On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 04:37:39PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote: > I think previous discussions on this list have made it clear that "legally > meaningful way" (as you put it) can be at most optional and is in practise not > applicable for non-trivial or a least medium-size-up upstream project.
Yes, we agree on that. > So by bring this up again now, you basically managed to throw away most of the > remaining buy-in from the developer body for DEP#5. Eh? > In other words, change your opinion to be in line with the majority opinion > and/or retract yourself from driving the DEP#5 proposal. I'm not sure what opinion you're talking about. > And making up large threads on -devel to "form your opinion" is not something > we can sustain in the project as a whole. I wrote: > I was asking questions so that I could understand this particular use case. How do you expect people to write a DEP without understanding the issues? > If everybody of the 1000 DDs (plus the DMs and other developers) queries > -devel to form their opinion on something, the project will simply stall > and/or be removed from one of its prime communication channels. Actually, I would argue that this is the list's raison d'être. Best, -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
