[ubuntu-art] Reversion to Dapper Artwork

[Toby Smithe]

On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 19:29 +0100, m c wrote:
> On 10/12/06, Mark Shuttleworth <mark at canonical.com> wrote:
> >  If you read that document (have you?) you'll see that the art team leads
> > explicitly set their own, personalised deadlines that are in sync with those
> > of the distro. It's not /the same/ it's an appropriate set of deadlines that
> > were a good plan - and it was not followed.
> >
> >  As a result - late night and early morning phone calls and emails from the
> > team leads trying to get this done.
> >
> 
> Yes - because the art work hasn't been a last second, deadline missing
> thing in the last four releases has it? To blame the community process
> for failures which have happened in all the other releases is a bit
> disingenuous, although accept you were trying to avoid this by setting
> up a formal process.
> 
> Anyway, I understand you don't want to waste time on this further, so
> thanks for clearing up your decision. I still suggest that artwork
> which doesn't meet your expectations is better than retaining the same
> artwork as Dapper resulting in a peoples expectations for radical
> change in Edgy being dashed further.

You may understand, but there's obviously no point in trying to sway the
decision. This community-driven distribution (Debian based, is it not?),
is completely and utterly totalitarian. I thought the term "dictator"
was benevolent! Obviously the merit of the old artwork set has not won
the -"ocracy". Or was it ever this way?

Why should the decision of a small set of people (the few people with
power) mean a recession for a much larger set. The survey on the Ubuntu
Forums was obviously a larger set than those making the decision, and so
set sizes can be discounted when talking in terms of opinion, as it is
obvious that the majority of people do not agree with the choice. I'm
very sorry to see it has come to that. Perhaps I won't congratulate the
team on release date, as I promised myself I would do, for bringing to
us such a wonderful distribution. This is not the Art team's fault, in
any way. This was Edgy, was it not? So far, as has been previously
mentioned, only one of the initial goals (when looking at the original
announcement) has been met. And I have seen sabdfl's blog post on the
announcement...