[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: why Ian Jackson won't discuss the "disputes" document draft with me

Branden Robinson writes ("Re: why Ian Jackson won't discuss the "disputes" document draft with me"):
> [Since Ian has said he won't listen to me, I'm making these remarks for
> the benefit of the rest of the Project.]
> What's informal about a joint resolution?  Are you sure you didn't mean
> to emphasize the first sentence instead?  If that's the case, why not
> just circulate this draft among the Technical Committee and have them
> vote yea or nay?

Well, I was kind of hoping that the BTS admins and the project leader
would agree that something like this was a good idea, think that my
draft was useful, suggest changes, and eventually we'd get to
something that we could all agree on one.

I was also hoping that people here on -project would have constructive
criticism (and explaining to me politely why they think the whole idea
is wrong, or why they don't like my draft at all, definitely

But, it's clear now that the BTS admins don't want to get involved -
officially at least - and the project leader isn't answering his
mail.  That means that if it's going to have any kind of official
blessing it can only be that of the tech-ctte.

I did in fact send the first draft to the tech-ctte list; the
remaining discussion has been here, because it seemed to me like it
was something that more people should get involved in, or at least
know about.

So, in the absence of anything convincing me otherwise, after I think
everyone's had a say here, I'll go back to the tech ctte very shortly
and propose it as a resolution there - and obviously it'll have the
names of the DPL and BTS admins taken off it.

I'm not going to reply to the rest of your mail, because I think it'll
just generate heat and not light.


Reply to: