<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> </head> <body> 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: <ul> <li>redkite</li> <li>bchoppr</li> <li>bsequencer</li> <li>dragonfly-reverb</li> <li>bshapr</li> <li>bslizr</li> <li>new-session-manager</li> <li>mcpdisp</li> </ul> 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 inquiry: <blockquote type="cite"><tt><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</tt></blockquote> 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 frustrations. 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 ubuntustudio.org </body> </html>