On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 13:25 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Matthias Clasen wrote: > > > >> I see that John asked for feedback 2 days ago, I don't see a single > >> reponse to that - do you really think that is sufficient discussion to > >> ratify this tomorrow ?! > > > > John send the mail and the meeting agenda for FESCo has the item listed > > again which provides alteast two different opportunities for folks to > > provide any feedback necessary. > > > > I send feedback via the wiki as asked in the earlier mail. Policies and > > guidelines are living documents and can (or will) be updated based on > > feedback if there is any even after they are ratified. Additional > > discussions can happen at any point of time. I was merely pointing out > > that feedback was indeed asked. > > That makes no sense. Are you seriously telling me that you ratify > changes that may be sub-par with the intent that they can be changed? > What is the point of voting then? Just let any old change through and > fix it later. No. > Sounds like you need to revise your ratification process (or lack > thereof) before people should feel comfortable following anything that > gets "voted" on. Rahul isn't on FESCo. And I agree this needs more discussion before being ratified. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
