Re: The Sourceless software in the kernel source GR
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> What is an issue is that a sloppy proposal mail may have
> mislead the sponsors to believe that a preamble was an introductory
> section, or vice versa. Hard to know unless the proposors and ponsors
> are clear about their intent.
Right, so when you disambiguate (either way), especially if your
understanding differs from the proposer, it makes sense to check back
with the sponsors. I don't see why that couldn't have been done in
this case.
Reply to: