Re: Supermajority requirement off-by-one error, and TC chairmanship
Pierre Habouzit writes ("Re: Supermajority requirement off-by-one error, and TC chairmanship"):
> And FWIW, I don't think TC failed to rule because of the majority
> rules, but just because the issue was technically not easy to solve at
> that time.
The TC would have decided if the supermajority rules had worked.
> If Ian had voted against he would have wanted to enforce the
> fair split as a "failed" vote instead given how passionate he was about
> the issue.
Please retract this outrageous allegation and apologise.
You're accusing me of bad faith.
You can find in the archives of the debian-ctte list my previous
complaint about the supermajority problem. My opinion about this
hasn't changed and doesn't depend on whether I happen to be in the
majority or the minority.
In fact, I'd like to think that if I'd been in the minority I would
have reissued the resolution and voted in favour of it, to give effect
to the rules as originally intended.
The most frustrating thing in the whole libc resolver thread was the
complete paralysis. Constant votes of FD from other committee members
followed by a lack of discussion.
Ian.
Reply to: