Pierre, I repeat, there are no vetos, for anyone.
Cheers Joe On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 11:04, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 4:01 PM Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 3:49 PM Joe Watkins <krak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Pierre, > > > > > > > The RFC process defines a veto and could be applied when needed. > > > > > > Can you show me where that is defined please ? > > > > In the current version, there is no mention of veto, which surprises > > me. It was definitively something that was in it. Zeev, Andi, other > > and myself discussed that part to hell back then. I cannot dig the > > revisions (the wiki box is extremely slow right now). If it was not, > > then we failed in the very first version as it was definitively agreed > > to have that veto (tbc :). > > And 500, so I give up digging :) > > By the way, the Group could do it anyway given the license and co. > However, again, the group never did it and will most likely never do > it anyway. > > The key points in my reply were other, which you may consider to > discuss rather than something that will never happen :) > > Best, > -- > Pierre > > @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org >
