---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: DebConf "Legal" BoF continued - lets get it to a Delegation Date: Friday 09 June 2006 17:04 From: Joerg Jaspert <joerg@ganneff.de> On 10680 March 1977, Alexander Schmehl wrote: > One bigger question: Shoudln't such a proposal be discussed in the team > before asking for formal delegation? And there it is now. I just wanted to get it cleared up with all that attended, as my memories of the BoF may be wrong, and then present it, but well, lets sent it there noe. > Till now I thought I was a member of the orga team. Seeing this topic > brought up in a "private" manner (not on the list) including names and > so, I'm quite suprised, puzzled and ignored by the way this proposal was > created. The way was simple: - Have the BoF, you were there, - Write a summary mail, show it Andreas, sent it to the others that were there. I dont understand the problem with that, I included everyone who showed interest. (Ok, obviously not -team, that was on my plan for later) >> > So, I propose to delegate > > Dear Joerg, do you remember our small discussion after CeBIT about your > person? Si. > I don't think it's appropiate to do the same comments again here, I'll > just say, that I don't think you are the right one to be a delegate to > organize the conf. Thank you. Thought about. I disagree. -- bye Joerg > Or write yourself a DFSG-free replacement for that piece of software. Using the copy and paste method from the old source, obscured by irrelevant changes. -------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgppyh3BGypRp.pgp
Description: PGP signature