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

Re: The Sourceless software in the kernel source GR

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:56:25 -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> said: 

> 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.

        I don't care about just the proposers opinion, I want to
 ensure that what the proposer is telling me is what the people and
 the sponsors also agreed to.  I suppose we could have a lengthy email
 exchange, and assume that the sponsors are still paying attention to
 every mail in the deluge that is -vote; or we can have an up front
 process that does not depend on a culture of heroes for success.

EARTH: Mostly harmless.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: