On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:58:39PM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 17:45 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:01:36PM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > > > The Fedora Board was asked to determine whether including MinGW bits was > > > a good idea. They said that it was, but that it should be separated from > > > the main Fedora repository, and that FESCo should determine the > > > specifics. (see: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2008-07-15) > > > > This meeting wasn't announced in the normal way (by a posting "Plan > > for tomorrows (DATE) ..." on fedora-devel-list), there are no IRC logs > > anywhere, no one asked anyone in the MinGW SIG to attend (and so they > > weren't there) and all we have is this fait-accompli message after the > > fact ... > > The Board meets (usually) every week on Tuesday. One meeting a month, > that meeting is public (IRC): > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/ > > This particular meeting was not public, thus, no one other than Board > members were invited. And IRC logs of this meeting ...? I notice people were at the meeting who aren't in FESCo. OK, maybe technically they just happened to be there and weren't "invited", but I think it's in the interests of everyone to find out who said what, in the open. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones Read my OCaml programming blog: http://camltastic.blogspot.com/ Fedora now supports 59 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#) http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
