On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:12:11PM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote: > On Tue, 28 Oct 2008, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote: > > > > | We realize that the proposal posted to the debian-devel-announce > > > | mailinglist is not yet finalized and may not have the support of a large > > > | part of our community. We invite the DAM to further develop his ideas > > > | in close coordination with other members of the project, and to present > > > | a new and improved proposal on the project's mailinglists in the future, > > > | at least two weeks prior to any planned implementation. > > > > I would like this to be phrased a bit stronger. IMHO any major change in > > how > > project membership is handeld should be endorsed by the whole project by > > GR. > > Would you be willing to add something like this? > > My initial version didn't even have the 'at least two ..' wording in it, > instead I expected it to read as "present on lists, wait for feedback, > only then implement".
I don't think that the exact time period is really important. If there is no broad consensus this will be clear after a few days anyway. > > Maybe it could be written as > > | [..] We invite the DAM to further develop his ideas > | in close coordination with other members of the project, and to present > | a new and improved proposal on the project's mailinglists in the future. > | > | Significant changes should only be implemented after consensus within > | the project at large has been reached, or when decided by a general > | resolution. > > How would that sound? Do you have a specific other wording you would > suggest? Sound good to me. Gaudenz -- Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better. ~ Samuel Beckett ~ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]