On Nov 27, 2007 11:18 AM, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 12:16 -0800, Craig L Russell wrote: > > Hi Upayavira, > > > > On Nov 26, 2007, at 11:28 AM, Upayavira wrote: > > > > >> I think that Someone needs to be responsible for these things, and I > > >> don't see that "the IPMC in general" or the IPMC chair specifically > > >> needs to have anything to do with them. > > > > > > If the podling is interested in getting its infra setup, which I would > > > assume it is, then I wouldn't worry about who is responsible. I'd just > > > say, "if in doubt, ask your mentor(s)" > > > > And the issue that prompted this discussion was that Robert a.k.a. > > RAT-man knew what to do, had the karma to do it, and didn't need to > > ask his mentors, but couldn't find any Policy that allowed him to > > "just do it". > > I think he was just being shy. He should have just got on with it :-)
craig guessed my intentions about right: trying to follow the letter of the law is a good way to understand whether the law is worthwhile (or not) (i've also been very busy rewriting the JAMES IMAP server so that it works with the upgraded evolution client that i'm trying to use ATM) - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
