Maxim Cournoyer writes: Hi Maxim,
> I think this would set a very dangerous precedent. We share the same fear: Setting a precedent. This was what motivated me to re-read GCD 001. My observation was that the process was not being followed exactly as was intended. This led me to propose a correction of the GCD 008 status. The GCD process was put in place to address the needs anyone may have, if and when each process particpant invests their time and energy into the process. Failing or refusing to do so for whatever reason, must not be allowed to lead to a veto. Please carefully [re-]consider the consequences of accepting a veto. Greetings, Janneke -- Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <[email protected]> | GNU LilyPond https://LilyPond.org Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar® https://AvatarAcademy.com
