Re: Communication of technical committee decisions (Re: [CTTE #614907] Resolution of node/nodejs conflict)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Le 21/07/12 22:35, Filipus Klutiero a écrit :
> Hi Arno,
>
> Arno Töll wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 18.07.2012 02:07, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>>> Thank you, but I would appreciate if debian-devel-announce
>>> would stay dedicated to important announcements which may be
>>> useful for a wide range of developers.
>>
>> While you are right in general I beg to disagree that tech-ctte
>> resolutions do affect a small notion of developers only.
>
> Although my message did imply that *some* tech-ctte resolutions
> only affect a small portion of developers, I did not intend to say
> that *all* tech-ctte resolutions do.
>
>> Thus, I appreciate they are sent to d-d-a now. While the node
>> naming conflict may not affect too many developer directly,
>> implications resolved by any tech-ctte decision do per
>> constitutional powers granted to that institution.
>
> Well, they may, but I don't see any here.
Come on, do you remember the thread about the node/nodejs name
conflict? I do appreciate being notified of the outcome.
This case will make jusrisprudence: next time a similar conflict
arise, we will now in advance how the tech-ctte is likely to rule.
Just take it as it is: _every_ decision made by the tech-ctte _is_ an
important announcement (and there's still not to many, there have
probably been already more mails in this thread than the tech-ctte has
issued decisions to d-d-a this year).
Regards, Thibaut.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=11sz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: