Sam Hartman <hartm...@debian.org> writes: > I would like to be heard and understood ...
> I hear Bdale's frustration when he talks about how long this has been > going on, and the concerns he raised about having to dig through the > entire history. > > For me, honoring the work of the debian-policy team is important. Being > able to help projects follow their processes is important. I really think the only difference here might be in how much of the process to date we've each been involved with. When this first hit the TC, I recall discussion about whether policy process had run its course or not and my belief was that we had consensus after input from Russ that in fact policy process had failed here and it was appropriate for the TC to intervene. I would have to go do more digging and reading to substantiate that assertion than I have time for this afternoon, but that's the position I *thought* we agreed we were in. Of course, a lot has changed in the time this issue has been with the TC. Where I struggle is in deciding the extent to which that means we need to "push reset" and start over on this vs bringing the issue to a reasonable conclusion and focusing our efforts instead on whatever comes next that we can look at with fresh eyes. > I'd like us to figure that out in a way where I feel heard. I hear you, I just don't have any idea what to do differently on this specific issue in response to knowing how you feel about it. Bdale
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
