Dear Charles, On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 09:23:25AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > for the moment, you have taken the way of the Technical Comitee, and this does > not require the intervention of the DPL. Asking the TC to solve a disagreement > between two parties should be the occasion to write down the problem in a clear > and concise way. In the case of Python, I think that it is really problematic > that the maintainer did not give his point of view in public yet; I hope that > it is only a question of time. Without interfering with the TC, as a DPL I > would ask to the python's maintainer to explain himself on our mailing lists > (this can be as simple as CCing the summary he has to send to the TC), and in > return would make sure that he will not him regret this concession, by discuss > in preliminary with the listmasters about the possiblity of limiting or > delaying messages in case of a momentary lapse of self-control (the big red > button that I proposed in another email). > > More in general, the DPL could be proactive. When a package or a service > becomes very popular and interdependant with the rest, I would contact the > responsible person or team and propose them to become more formal via a DPL > delegation. Thank you for sharing your opinion on this issue. Kumar -- > What is the status of Linux' Unicode implementation. Will Linux > be prepared for the first contact? We have full klingon console support just in case -- Alan Cox on linux-kernel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature