On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 05:44:06PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 12:33:58AM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote: > > Short and sweet and lacks political hubbub. Just decide that we > > shouldn't have to change release policy 6 months after the release > > was supposed to happen. Why sould really need to modify SC or > > foundation document for saying that? > If it requires something which is forbidden by a foundation document, > then it can't take effect until that issue is resolved.
Any textual basis for that claim? For the converse, 2.1.1 of the constitution requires that "[Developers] must not actively work against these rules and decisions properly made under them." Falsely claiming that a GR can't be implemented would seem to be violating that rule. Is that claim false? Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``Like the ski resort of girls looking for husbands and husbands looking for girls, the situation is not as symmetrical as it might seem.''
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
