On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 10:36:07PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Admittedly, many of the others are due to confusion on the part of
all the examples you've posted so far have been examples of either slackness,
indecision, or stupidity, not deliberate deception as you first claimed.
but that is
On 2004-04-15 06:42:03 +0100 Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 10:36:07PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
maintainers who think (presumably because of the nonsense puffed out
over the years) that the DFSG doesn't apply to documentation.
as i pointed out in my last
On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 09:19:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Even if not "decided" unanimously, the "jury" doesn't seem to be in much
> doubt on it
where's the GR and the vote? hasn't happened. where's the policy decision?
doesn't exist.
in other words, it hasn't been decided yet.
> and it is d
On 2004-04-15 06:42:03 +0100 Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 10:36:07PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
maintainers who think (presumably because of the nonsense puffed out
over the years) that the DFSG doesn't apply to documentation.
as i pointed out in my last mes
On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 09:19:39AM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Even if not "decided" unanimously, the "jury" doesn't seem to be in much
> doubt on it
where's the GR and the vote? hasn't happened. where's the policy decision?
doesn't exist.
in other words, it hasn't been decided yet.
> and it is d
5 matches
Mail list logo
