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

Re: Proposal - Statement that Sarge will follow Woody requirement for main.

On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 05:44:06PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 12:33:58AM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote:
> > Short and sweet and lacks political hubbub. Just decide that we
> > shouldn't have to change release policy 6 months after the release
> > was supposed to happen. Why sould really need to modify SC or 
> > foundation document for saying that?
> If it requires something which is forbidden by a foundation document,
> then it can't take effect until that issue is resolved.

Any textual basis for that claim?

For the converse, 2.1.1 of the constitution requires that "[Developers]
must not actively work against these rules and decisions properly made
under them." Falsely claiming that a GR can't be implemented would seem
to be violating that rule. Is that claim false?


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

``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking
  for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: