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

Re: Social Committee proposal

On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 06:34:47PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> I'd rather see consensus, and, more specifically, see the
> >> soc-ctte spell out the social norms
> > The developer's reference, for example, includes several social
> > norms already - anything that isn't a strict technical obligation
> > but instead a matter of procedure and/or courtesy.
>         But the dev-ref is optional -- last time I read it, I did not
>  find it very useful tome, and I disagreed with a lot of its dictums,
>  and so I largely ignore it while building packages; I rely on my
>  sense of best practices. The tech ctte does not come down on me like
>  a tonne of bricks for not removing the . from my short descriptions.

The social committee wouldn't do anything of the sort; like Lars said,
it could spell out the norms. Coming down on people like a tonne of bricks
would be anti-social, which would would go against the very notion of
a *social* committee.

     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to: