Ian Jackson writes ("Re: mixmaster /etc/default/*"):
> Anthony Towns writes ("Re: mixmaster /etc/default/*"):
> > This is exactly the sort of thing I think we should simply ignore rather
> > than issue any sort of ruling on. It's simply not important enough to
> > be an issue. ie, unless someone on the tech ctte wants to champion the
> > submitter's cause, I think we should simply reassign the bug back to
> > mixmaster and close it. Err, if it's actually been assigned to the ctte
> > by now.
>
> I find it hard to understand this suggestion of yours. [...]
Also, another question I forgot to ask. Are the ballot options on my
draft ballot (K explicitly approving of the existing policy and the
existing package behaviour as laid out between my -8<- cut marks, and
FD as the alternative) sufficient to express your view ?
If you want to propose an alternative resolution please do so ASAP
because as I say I would like to call for a vote. Do you want
something like
-8<-
We do not think it appropriate to make a substantive ruling
on this matter, and will not discuss it any more.
-8<-
[ ] Choice N: No substantive decision, no further discussion
?
I have to say I think that would be bizarre.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
