On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:51:59PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Same reason as above: it shouldn't be me asking for that. > > That's rediculous. If you would like to have access and view, you > should ask. We cannot process your request unless the Debconf people > agree, though, howver putting them in Cc will give them a chance to > agree and disagree. Two of them have agreed already if I remember > correctly.
Well, it's a matter of personal taste I guess. Instead of asking
directly and letting DebConf team know via Cc:, I've opted for
discussing the matter first with DebConf team and only in the end come
to FFIS with a consensual decision asking to act.
FWIW, the two of them have already agreed to merge the accounts.
> > to know the actual total amount of reserves would need to check two
> > accounts instead of one.
> Maybe it's easier to write this as relation like in databases:
> account/login 1 ---- n earmarks for money
>
> The auditors account is totally separate from your account. Both can
> view some projects. They can be the same, but the could be different,
> they could also be several of which some are shared.
I've made a poor choice of words above. "account" was not meant to be a
synonym of "login", but rather "account" in the bank sense, as in
"savings account". So what I meant above was that it would be handier
if we could see the total amount of savings in a single table, instead
of having to check 2 distinct tables and sum up money.
I understand it seems just a minor annoyance, but trust me: when you
already have several trusted organizations around the world to check,
adding an extra fork in even one of them is a bit of a PITA.
> > All in all, I observe we're now re-discussing things from
> > scratch---starting from Richard's mail---while at the beginning of this
> > thread it seemed to me we agreed in going ahead with the merge.
>
> I'm sorry. I hope that I don't add more confusion. I'm only trying
> to help and offer possibilities and answer questions if somebody asks.
Absolutely agreed, and thanks for doing that.
> Additionally, it occurs to me that you're discussing things that can
> be solved much easier than you think - or I'm unable to parse some of
> the mails.
Well, barring disagreement from others, it seems to me that the initial
proposal of doing the merge is very simple.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
