Communication Improvements/frustrations

Erich Eickmeyer eeickmeyer at
Sat Aug 8 17:56:33 UTC 2020

Hello all,

I'm writing this as a frustrated flavor lead. There is some unacceptable
behavior from the release team and the archive admins toward myself and
perhaps, more generally, the Ubuntu Studio flavor.

There are a total of 8 packages awaiting review for over a month now.
Supposedly this is a "queue" and that I *shouldnt't* bug
#ubuntu-release, but it seems that other packages are favored more than
the multimedia/audio production packages. Honestly, I have no idea why
these packages are sitting there awaiting review. I shouldn't have to
ping ubuntu-archive in #ubuntu-release to get this done. When I have,
I've been told it's a "queue".

These are the packages awaiting review:

  * redkite
  * bchoppr
  * bsequencer
  * dragonfly-reverb
  * bshapr
  * bslizr
  * new-session-manager
  * mcpdisp

These have been awaiting review since July 7th and haven't seen even a
cursory glance, save dragonfly-reverb with got deferred by one archive
admin to be looked-at by another archive admin.

Additionally, I'm getting told items like this telling me information
that I should somehow magically already know. Backstory: zita-ajbridge
had an approved SRU for a 100% CPU usage issue and has been stuck in
focal-proposed for over a week, the Monday-Thursday stuff
notwithstanding. This occurred in #ubuntu-release as a response to my

> <vorlon> Eickmeyer: zita-ajbridge> you know this week was focal .1
> release, right?  So promotions from -proposed to -updates were frozen
> in order to not derail the ISO mastering.  If this was something that
> you felt should have gone into the .1 media, you would've needed to
> communicate it directly to the release team in time for inclusion. 
> But at this point it will need to wait until Monday
I did not know there were freezes just prior to point releases (nor can
I find the documentation though I'm open to it being pointed-out), and I
feel like the way this information was presented to me was rude and
possibly outside of the Ubuntu Code of Conduct.

My intention was not to get it into the .1 release, but to get it /*into
the updates to begin with*/. Additionally, the .1 release is the excuse
I was given for why the packages awaiting review for groovy hadn't been
reviewed yet.

Is Ubuntu Studio a burden and unwelcome? Are you upset that it didn't
die the way it was going to two years ago before I got to it? Honestly,
I'm getting tired of the unprofessional behavior from people and
processes that should just work. If you don't want Ubuntu Studio around,
let me know. But I'm getting real tired of sending these emails with my

If it's too much work, then you need to seek-out and identify additional
archive admins and release team members. I realize this requires a large
amounts of expertise, but failing to identify these people is a
leadership failure at its core (my degree is in leadership, so this is
something I can authoritatively speak on).

Additionally, I expect the same amount of courtesy and respect as anyone
else. Instead, I'm treated as though I'm unintelligent and annoying,
especially by Steve Langasek. This behavior needs to stop. I respect
Steve's knowledge and expertise, but the treatment I consistently get
from him is belittling at best.

I'm also sorry to post this publicly, but I feel as though this needs to
be talked about in a more public forum since I've attempted to have
these discussions privately to no avail. I also feel as though my
frustration needs to be adequately expressed.

With that, I expect real solutions and responses, not lip service. Thank
you for your time.
Erich Eickmeyer
Project Leader
Ubuntu Studio

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pEpkey.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 5686 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list