>>>>> "Ansgar" == Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org> writes: Ansgar> Hi, I would like to ask people to wait a bit longer before Ansgar> calling for a vote. Michael Biebl said he is looking into Ansgar> drafting an alternative, but has been too busy with work in Ansgar> the last few days. He would therefore like to have a bit Ansgar> more time to prepare. I'm sorry, but I've been trying to work with Michael for a number of months to get his input on these issues. He has told me that the problem is not me, but that even answering the question of why responding to the mails I have sent is too emotionally difficult to engage in. He's been aware that I'm considering this issue since September and has known that I planned to propose a GR since my September/October bits mail. Michael has been invited to engage in this process repeatedly, but has chosen not to do so. There's nothing wrong with that. We are all volunteers. However, when you choose to not engage with a discussion, you need to gracefully accept that you lose influence. Doing anything else means that you're trying to block the work of others in a very disrespectful manner. But there is a huge problem with trying to block forward motion at the last minute with a completely new option that no one has seen. In this instance, blocking on Michael would be implementing exactly one of the negative patterns Ian talks about in his proposal. As we've discussed before, there are two significant costs to waiting: * Many people have talked about the high costs of these discussions. I've seen comments to that effect on debian-devel and from multiple people on IRC. There have been a lot of emails in this discussion. Following this has been a significant cost for all of us. Dragging that out has costs. * Delaying the CFV runs into significant chance of having most of the vote be up against the holidays, making it harder for people to vote. Delaying the CFV into January leaves the discussion open way too long at least if you value the concerns raised about the cost of the discussion. Depending on how the discussion between Lucas and Ian goes, I can see delaying the CFV for a couple of days while they hammer out amendments. People who want to wait are free to rank further discussion above other options. You can still express your preferences among the existing options while ranking further discussion first. I do not support delaying the CFV for an option that has not gained sponsors.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature