On Sunday, Sep 21, 2003, at 17:22 Europe/Rome, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Ah, at the end, if a committer considers this unfair, maybe he/she
should question him/herself before questioning hundreds of his/her peers.
Umm, ....
... and the "standard member line" gets rolled out once again to justify the absence of incubator documentation, process, policy, and accountability.
stephen, this carp of yours is really starting to get up my nose.
ah, the good old days of recontextualization fights at avalon-dev. I was missing them so much... NOT!!!
stefano did nothing of the sort; here's the *whole* part of his message which you conveniently snipped:
There is no policy yet, but if the incubator was to make a policy, I would be against having an ASF committer which is not a member or officer being an incubating sponsor.
Why? simple enough. If that person was believed good for the job by his/her peers, he would have been already a member or an officer. Or, his/her action would make him/her visible for the next election, if deserved.
Ah, at the end, if a committer considers this unfair, maybe he/she should question him/herself before questioning hundreds of his/her peers.
there's nothing in there making the least attempt to justify anything
about the incubator. it's a statement of stefano's opinion of how
he'd feel *if* a particular policy were developed, and why he feels that
way.
so, please: knock it off.
<applause/>
-- Stefano.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
