Daniel Goller posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Mon, 24 Apr 2006 02:16:48 -0500:
> the reason for my feedback was to have things laid out much clearer, > less vague and thus avoid problems down the road by situations occuring > in which things go like "well i thought i (a QA dev) had the right to > ...." or "i (reg dev) didn't know they (QA) could do ..." > be clear on both sides by laying this out so there are no > misunderstandings or misinterpretations Agreed. I'm not prepared to try to argue the definition of "policy" further here, so I'll yield the point. If others find value in the point, they'll take it up. If not, well it must not have been that important to other than you and me after all. =8^) In any case, two things of value came of it. For Gentoo, it provoked the super-majority idea, which may or may not resonate enough to take root but I think it's worth debating, anyway. For myself, I became aware of a word interpretation inconsistency I wasn't aware of, thus gaining insight into myself. Maybe it's me that's out of sync. =8^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
