On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 01:16:50PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > To be even more explicit, the release team delegation[1] states: > --------------------------------------------------------------->8 > The Release Team oversees and manages the releases of the > testing, stable, and oldstable distributions (aka suites). > > * Release Team members decide on the release schedule > (e.g. freeze dates, release dates for stable and point > releases for stable and oldstable). > > * Release Team members define the content of the suites listed > above, that is: > > - They define the packages that are part of those suites. > Generally, that is achieved by deciding: > > - Which issues are release-critical (RC) (ie. making the > affected packages not suitable for stable releases) > usually by setting the corresponding bug's severity to > serious, grave or critical. > --------------------------------------------------------------->8 > Is it unreasonable to expect that the Release Team continue its longstanding practice of doing the aforementioned things in a collaborative way? My recollection is that the Release Team adopts guidelines/rules which have either been discussed thoroughly (and thus a project-wide consensus has been reached/established) or which have been the result of a formal decision-making process of the project (e.g., GR, tech-ctte deliberation, etc).
What is happening with the packages that Salvo maintains here is quite obviously arbitrary and capricious. Just looking at the bugs that were referenced in the very first email from Salvo to this list about this particular topic, the sequence of events was: - CT member files RC bugs, without discussion or rationale - maintainer closes the bugs - RT member steps in, re-opens the bugs, with the rationale being "today I decide that this package no longer belongs in Debian" BTW, I would argue that Paul exceeded the authority of the delegation that the Release Team has (though it was perhaps not his intention). The Release Team gets to decide what goes into a release. It is the FTP masters who are ultimately responsible for what packages are permitted in the various sections of the Debian archive. > [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2020/07/msg00004.html > > The same wording has been in place since 2013: > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2013/12/msg00007.html > > If you want to override this release team decision, see Constitution[2], > 4.1.3: https://www.debian.org/devel/constitution.en.html > This really is laughable. In the recent past there has been a fair amount of criticism directed towards DDs who have initiated or supported GRs without first trying to discuss a matter and get to some kind of consensus. Salvo literally does what has been repeatedly described as the "right thing" before moving towards a GR, and he is being told that he is wrong and that he should have gone for a GR. We should probably decide which way is "right". Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez
