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

Re: Summary: Proposal - Rescind GR 2004-003

On Sat, May 08, 2004 at 10:14:38AM +0200, Davide G. M. Salvetti wrote:
> >>>>>  OA == Osamu Aoki [2004-5-7]
> OA> * Can Craig and people who seconded original proposal [2] to second
> OA> this as the formal rationale for Craig's proposal [1]?
> I think that Craig's proposal should be on the ballot, therefore I
> signed it.
> I more or less agree with some (actually not so many, by far not all) of
> the rationales listed by Osamu.  

Please point out if you find factual mistakes.

> However, I don't think I need to agree with all of these, or even any,
> for that matter; in fact, I don't exactly understand what our
> secretary would want seconders to state about the rationales part.

The reason was explained by our secretary.  He does not wish to be
caught in the middle.  (like now)

> Coming to the Osamu's proposed reformulation, I like Craig's original
> wording much more than that.  In particular I don't like that «but
> recognizing that changing the Social Contract today would have grave
> consequences for the upcoming stable release, a fact which does not
> serve our goals or the interests of our users» thing at all: I suggest
> stripping it off completely.

Hmm.... I had no intention to change Craig's original.  What he wrote
was an incomplete sentence referencing Steve's proposal.  These words
slipped in from Steve's when I tried to make a full proposal out of
them.  I think your interpretation of "deletes everything but clause 1
of this proposal" makes sense too.  I merely thought Craig was killing
clause 2.

I will second it either way.  (But I do not want to have 2 ways.)

Craig, please speak up which way you meant.  And let's move on.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: