Tobias Ringström <tobias@ringstrom.mine.nu> writes:
> >No vote would have been necessary. Just say "Wow, this problem is
> >really bad, we need a new release, and I volunteer to do whatever's
> >necessary to make that happen, up to and including RM if Ben's busy."
>
> What I did was to say that 1.0.8 and 1.1.0 had a really bad regression
> and that we needed to make new releases ASAP. I asked people to go to
> STATUS and vote.
Well, we use STATUS to vote on the changes that should go in in a
release, not on the question of whether to do a release at all... So
people probably didn't understand what you wanted them to do in
STATUS. (I know I didn't.)
> The only developers who said anything reasoned
> against making a 1.0.x release at all, and against making a quick
> 1.1.x release (which was basically my whole proposal). I will
> certainly not go forward if every other developer who says anything is
> against the idea. I don't see how this has anything to do with Ben as
> the RM, or me offering to be RM for those releases.
Ah. Let me try to explain it better:
The point of offering to do the work (be RM or whatever) is not that
doing so meets some formal guideline. The point is that it puts the
momentum on your side. Think about it psychologically. There are two
ways you can ask the question:
1. "Does everyone agree that we need a release?"
- versus -
2. "Will anyone *stop* me from making a release?"
Technically (1) and (2) are the same question, yes. But asking (2) is
far more far more likely to result in a release, I think you can see
why.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 12 03:41:57 2004