On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:46:36PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > > * Each infrastructure team has not added any new members according to > > the rule above, but has had to mark at least two members as latent > > in the same period, has to accept at least one new valid candidate. > > The second rule is meant to address the situation where a team is losing > members to inactivity, but two years haven't passed yet (otherwise the first
Then maybe just adding an "as soon as possible" would do? :
> > * Each infrastructure team has not added any new members according to
> > the rule above, but has had to mark at least two members as latent
> > in the same period, has to accept at least one new valid candidate.
^
as soon as possible
(and maybe we can remove "at least", since one can then keep on applying
again the very same rule).
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
[EMAIL PROTECTED],cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
