Then let's hear your proposal
Sergey Spiridonov <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> It is not only one-way. DFSG itself should be updated if it becomes
> out of date.
Then lets hear it. What do you propose? It should be clear by now
that most folks here, at best, don't understand your position well
enough to help you draft such a proposal. If you think there's a
problem, let's hear your fix. Feel free to get help from anyone who
seems to agree with you. Take your time, write it up, nail down all
the details you can, and then come back and let us see it. If you
think we need a separate set of documentation guidelines, write them
up. Don't forget to describe the process for deciding which set of
guidelines to apply.
That will give us a chance to discuss the issue based on a concrete
understanding of the issue, as you see it -- which we currently, in my
opinion, don't in the least have.
There's no point to the flaming going on. If we continue on the
current track, all that's going to happen is that we'll eventually
exhaust our interest in discussing it with you -- which isn't really
in your best interest, or ours. As things currently stand, I see no
possible way for the discussion to be productive. If you want a
productive discussion, it's up to you to do your part.
In other words, "put up or shut up".
Jeremy Hankins <email@example.com>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03