motu-release

[Stefan Potyra]

Hi,

Am Thursday 18 February 2010 02:09:04 schrieb Steve Langasek:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:32:13PM +0100, Stefan Potyra wrote:
> > Agreed. Delegating freeze decisions for a set of packages matches very
> > much what we've done with delegates so far :).
> >
> > motu-release chose the relevant delegates themselves. With "decisions in
> > terms of freeze exceptions", I meant that not motu-release chooses
> > delegates, but any team can handle freeze exception requests for a given
> > subset of packages how the team think it's best. Of course this should
> > include a responsibility to ask the release-team in case of potentially
> > contentious packages.
>
> That's precisely the model that I'm arguing against.  If there are to be
> delegations here, they should be decided on a per-team basis, not as a
> blanket policy.  So not "any team can handle" - only teams for which we
> identify delegates that we're confident are on the same page with the rest
> of the release team.

Ok, was just an idea. Your proposal sounds good to me as well.

Cheers,
    Stefan.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20100218/2e5d30e4/attachment-0001.pgp