[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

On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 01:52:47AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> 	When I read a draft with a bunch of co-authors names on the
>  authors list, I do tend to assume that the co-authors have signed on
>  to the document.

*shrug* Your assumption was wrong: both in that people hadn't signed on,
and in that it was never meant to be taken that way.

For comparison, when someone proposes a general resolution, it takes
the form "The Debian Project resolves to...", even before everyone in
the project has had any chance to comment at all, let alone agree. The
group that's going to issue a recommendation/whatever and the authors
aren't necessarily one and the same.

I'm not sure why you're making such a big deal over this; it's not like
it was posted to -announce, or claimed it was in any way official, or,
well, anything. It was a draft: working out the appropriate group to
issue it is up for comment just as much as anything else in it.

There're plenty of things that're worth getting hysterical about (eg,
that we have 20,000 open bugs), surely confusion over the authorship of
some draft guidelines isn't one of them?


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''

Attachment: pgpEgDWSiZrMN.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: