* Mark Wielaard via Overseers: > Hi David, > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 01:14:50PM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote: >> an alternative proposal? When were they allowed to participate in the >> preparation of the "Sourceware" proposal, supposedly for their benefit? > > It wasn't really meant as an alternative proposal. And tt shouldn't be > in conflict with finding alternative sources of funding, creating a > technical advisory committee or having some managed services. And it > is a about having a public discussion. > > - Sourceware roadmap discussions > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/overseers/2022q2/018453.html > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/overseers/2022q2/018529.html > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/overseers/2022q3/018636.html > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/overseers/2022q3/018716.html
Overseers was a hidden list until recently: <https://web.archive.org/web/20220826033101/https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo> I'm pointing this out to show how difficult it is to build public consensus. You might think you are doing it, but the view from the outside is probably quite different. Thanks, Florian
