On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 10:21:06PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> In this case, I'll have to voice my concern again that I really fear
> that it's going to be even more confusing if we change the words
> behind the abbreviation only (nobody will know about this change if
> we don't advertize it enough).
No, you don't have to: repeating argument is not useful in a discussion,
unless you add new evidence.
> Also, I don't get why you are writing that changing names for DD/DM
> will deserve a GR and constitution review, when changing from NM to
I didn't write that.
[ and this is likely my last post in this sub-thread, unless new
evidence/arguments appear ]
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature