On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:08:36 +0200, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Is there any harm in refining the changes and building consensus
>> over time? The change document can exist as a talking point, and
>> you can still come in and provide us your input when you have time
>> (post etch).
> Personally, I would see it as a waste of time to take part in a
> discussion in which one of the involved parties is not involved (due
> to time constraints). And that's going to be my last public mail
> about this topic...
I see this as a long process, and by no means do I want to
exclude any one. There are a number of low hanging errors that can
be eliminated before we get to the more complex cases where we need
to get the input of everyone.
Also, consider the fact that in a project this size, there is
probably no time that is good enough for every one. By starting the
refinement now, and taking our time to get it right (I do not have an
arbitrary deadline before which policy must be fixed and rushed out
of the door), we are more likely to get a document that is in good
shape.
If you think you can only participate in the process after
Etch is released, that is fine. Policy is not going anywhere.
manoj
--
You don't move to Edina, you achieve Edina. Guindon
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
