On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 01:46:27AM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> I don't need to swallow this. I tried all I can to bring the nm-discussion
> to a good end. Please compare wicherts original proposal, my input to it,
> and the input of many other people such as Phillip Hands, Adam Harris and
> so on, and then look at Wicherts updated proposal on -project.
>
> From my point of view, it got even worse, and it has not moved just a little
> bit towards an acceptable proposal for me.
I don't entirely disagree with this actually; I'd rather n-m behaved
somewhat differently to how Wichert describes it. But I'd already gone
over that in -private and I wasn't really concerned enough to go over
it again in -project. No one else seemed to either, actually, and the
public thread in -project didn't really come to anything.
> What else can I do?
Restate your objections in public? (Forward the appropriate mails from
-private to -project?)
Become a member of n-m and subvert it from within? (Under the `those
what do the work make the rules' theory)
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it
results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
-- Linus Torvalds
Attachment:
pgpf3Qp_0vwbV.pgp
Description: PGP signature