On Tuesday 13 December 2005 11:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 11:39:49 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > | > So... If, hypothetically speaking, someone were to write a GLEP > | > saying "move developer documentation into the QA group, restructure > | > said documentation to this new format etc etc", and the QA group > | > were in favour, and the developer community in general were in > | > favour, and the council were in favour, and the people proposed by > | > the GLEP to manage the new documentation were in favour, but the > | > existing owners of the developer documentation were not, you're > | > saying that it shouldn't be approved? > | > | Yes. > > Unworkable. Your proposal would allow a small group of obstinate > developers to hold back progress. The problem here is that the council > isn't acting as a decent last line of quality control when the GLEP > authors fail to do their jobs properly. Your GLEP is trying to solve > the wrong thing...
Wrong. I'll expand on the "Yes" now that I've got a few minutes... Actually, I'll turn that into a "No". I misread "the people proposed by the GLEP to manage the new documentation" in my rush to leave for work this morning. The existing owners don't matter to the GLEP. They can continue to maintain the existing documentation if they wish. If you didn't have new people to maintain the new documentation however... -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
