> "Didier" == Didier 'OdyX' Raboud writes:
Didier> Hi all, could we re-focus this discussion on what qualities
Didier> the current Technical Committee Members want to find in new
Didier> TC members, please?
My current thinking based on the input we got from TC members is we
might
Hi all,
could we re-focus this discussion on what qualities the current
Technical Committee Members want to find in new TC members, please?
I'm not saying that the "process about handling new requests to the TC"
discussion is worthless to have, but it just feels like a hijack of that
bug log.
Could not follow your message enough to read. I may get back to it
later when I have more spoons.
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Bug#797533: New CTTE members"):
>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
> Ian> I.e. that an incoming issue should, at least if the petitioner
> Ian> requests, be subject to a quick vote on whether to preserve the
> Ian> status quo (perhaps by overruling to at least te
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 09:37:28AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> What I'm hearing is that there seems to be general support for TC
> members calling for quick votes in cases like this. If I were doing it
> I'd probably give 24 hours to comment on an interim ballot and then do a
> CFV.
It seems to m
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Bug#797533: New CTTE members"):
>> For what it's worth I don't support this sort of automated stuff.
Ian> Um, I'm confused. I did not suggest what I would think of
Ian> `automated stuff'. That is, I am not suggest
Sam Hartman writes ("Re: Bug#797533: New CTTE members"):
> For what it's worth I don't support this sort of automated stuff.
Um, I'm confused. I did not suggest what I would think of `automated
stuff'. That is, I am not suggesting there should be a robot, or an
absolute rule.
I am suggesting th
> "Ian" == Ian Jackson writes:
Ian> j...@joshtriplett.org writes ("Bug#797533: New CTTE members"):
>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 11:57:59AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> > At that point, I'd see it more like overrule maintainer pending
>> longer > discussion.
Ian> That would
j...@joshtriplett.org writes ("Bug#797533: New CTTE members"):
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 11:57:59AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > At that point, I'd see it more like overrule maintainer pending longer
> > discussion.
That would have been a much better answer to #766708.
> That's not a bad plan, a
9 matches
Mail list logo
