Jakub Moc wrote: > Erm, what exactly could have been discussed, the revised GLEP being submitted > about a day before the council meeting? Are you expecting people to hang on > email 24/7?
No, but I surely expect people interested in the discussion to read the last month council meeting decisions. See my answer to Ciaran. > Email address is a means of communication with people, not a *power*. If > anyone's interested in/does care for what's the exact role of that particular > person in Gentoo, that's what roll-call is for. AT or not, any person w/ > @gentoo.org email address is representing Gentoo, [...] Well, I'd tend to lean in your direction, but read the discussion (the original one, when teh GLEP was originally submitted) and you will see quite a lot of people who disagree with you. The fact that you're the vocal ones today doesn't mean you represent everyone. In fact, that's what the council members have been elected for. To take decisions on things where no consensus is reached. > Now, we might we perhaps move the focus to more important issues jstubbs > mentioned in his last email, expecting that any implementation of the now > approved GLEP wrt the email addresses won't be pushed in a similar way the > whole revised GLEP has been, until infra issues and usefulness of this are > sorted out/reconsidered at least. 75% of his email is about things that were in the original GLEP. Why didn't he raise his voice at that time ? -- Koon -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
