Re: mixmaster /etc/default/*

[Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk>]

Ian Jackson writes ("Re: mixmaster /etc/default/*"):
> Anthony Towns writes ("Re: mixmaster /etc/default/*"):
> > This is exactly the sort of thing I think we should simply ignore rather
> > than issue any sort of ruling on. It's simply not important enough to
> > be an issue. ie, unless someone on the tech ctte wants to champion the
> > submitter's cause, I think we should simply reassign the bug back to
> > mixmaster and close it. Err, if it's actually been assigned to the ctte
> > by now.
> 
> I find it hard to understand this suggestion of yours.  [...]

Also, another question I forgot to ask.  Are the ballot options on my
draft ballot (K explicitly approving of the existing policy and the
existing package behaviour as laid out between my -8<- cut marks, and
FD as the alternative) sufficient to express your view ?

If you want to propose an alternative resolution please do so ASAP
because as I say I would like to call for a vote.  Do you want
something like

 -8<-
  We do not think it appropriate to make a substantive ruling
  on this matter, and will not discuss it any more.
 -8<-

  [ ] Choice N: No substantive decision, no further discussion

?

I have to say I think that would be bizarre.

Ian.