On Sat, May 29, 1999 at 10:23:32PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote: > Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > b) Formally seconded, and a time > > table set for discussion (normally normal bug, titled [AMENDMENT > > yy/mm/dd] > > 10 days to a month) > > How many seconds should this require? 1 or 2?
2 IMHO. Manojs argument was that if a proposal doesn't even get the attention of two developers, what may it be worth? > > Should we keep the rejected proposals around in the BTS in > > state fixed, so that one does not have to redo the old arguments over > > again? > > Well it's all mostly archived in the list archives too, if someone brings up > an old issue it can be found there. BTW, does somebody know why the old bugs are completely erased? Shouldn't they be left there for future reference? I mean all bug reports that were closed, not only policy bugs. Of course, the BTS would need a filter to handle this, and a few more commands. Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org finger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org master.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
