Re: Draft GR for permitting private discussion
Michael Gilbert <email@example.com> writes:
> I am a DD. You may have missed the most important part of my last
> message about positively solving these problems via liberal nmus (a
> DD-only power). Please read that paragraph. It demonstrates an
> alternative solution already put to use in practice that can resolve
> maintainership problems without tech committee intervention.
I read your entire message. I snipped the parts on which I have no
> Since it seems that there is a lot of momentum to push this GR forward,
> I would like to make a simple request to slow it down a bit. Please
> initiate the discussion on -project before initiating the GR itself so
> this can get more visibility and you all can get a better gauge of a
> larger set of the project's opinion on the matter.
The whole point of the GR discussion period is to have exactly these sorts
of discussions. I would prefer to use our existing processes rather than
using new processes to "pre-discuss" things for which there's already a
standard discussion process.
The GR should definitely be mentioned on -project to ensure that people
know that the discussion is happening.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>