On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 04:11:53AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > On 2004-04-28 03:33:54 +0100 Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I second this proposal.
> Not picking on Joe in particular, but will there ever be a proposal > dropped from the sky without discussion by a generally-known name that > doesn't gain enough seconds for a vote before it can be fixed? > "Further discussion" would be a really just vote for this sort of poor > action. So please discuss, propose amendments, and get them seconded (or accepted). Our procedures make it piss-easy to get alternate options on the ballot; I can't believe, from following this list, that the reason the previous GR failed to be fixed was because the discussion period was cut short in the midst of serious progress. I am not particularly interested in providing a comprehensive list of ballot options to cover all possible views of DDs, here. What I *am* interested in doing is getting a GR out the door that will put an end to the current pointless flaming (which is what I thought the first GR was supposed to achieve, sigh) and put us back on track for getting a stable release out this summer. If you believe this particular proposal is ill-considered or wrong, please see paragraph one. Two weeks should be plenty of time to convince five of your friends that your idea is better. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
