Hi, first, you've made the point that you were hoping the TC would help the blends team and the d-i team work together. I think that Phil's suggestions for a technical approach are quite good, and I hope that will move forward in the buster cycle. With regard to stretch, I honestly don't think there is anything that we can do that we believe that we should do. Some of us think Cyril might being overly conservative in his initial decision. I suspect though that we almost all believe that now is way too late. Also, I think all the TC members believe that Cyril is the one who ultimately should have made the is it too late decision for stretch. I don't think there's more information he could have been given that would have helped with that. "You'll get what you want, but not in the time line you want," is a frustrating outcome. However, it is the kind of compromise that is often right in this situation. >>>>> "Ole" == Ole Streicher <email@example.com> writes: Ole> Yea, I should improve my reading skills for english. This is my Ole> misunderstanding. However, if this refers to the number of Ole> votes within TC (right?), counting that would have been part of Ole> the decision. The TC has to vote in order to override someone or to use its constitutional powers. The TC doesn't need to "vote" in order to decide to support an existing decision; we can do this by consensus. We didn't need to hold a vote for me to read the discussion and have high personal confidence that there would be insufficient votes to support your position. marga proposed closing the bug--deciding by consensus. No one on the TC .objected to doing that. That's a fairly good sign in our processes it is the right decision. She ended up deciding to call for a vote. Based on the results of that vote it seems fairly clear it would have been reasonable to close the vote by consensus as well. Votes are kind of a crappy way to make such decisions.
Description: PGP signature