Re: base dependency warning
at Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 06:25:33 -0800,
on Subject: Re: base dependency warning,
Joey Hess <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> It's also current policy. I tacked it on only for reference. I'm not
> accepting amendments that change that paragrpah, because I am only changing
> a prt of policy to document existing practice, but you're quite welcome to
> make your own proposal.
> (It's odd -- in my last two proposals, I have quoted a little scrap of
> context, and people have been keen to change that. Perhaps more people
> should be reading policy and seeing what they think needs to be changed in
We found that paragraph should be changed, so after your proposal
will be passed, some one should make new proposal, I think.
I second your change on "a part of policy to document existing prctice".
If I can, I will make my proposal to change the last paragraph, with
the help and advice from other people. I think it helps the work for
boot-floppies, and I wish to do the work for boot-floppies, though
I do not have enough skill and time to do development of it.
Taketoshi Sano: <email@example.com>,<firstname.lastname@example.org>,<email@example.com>