On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 12:49 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Friday, 03 October 2008 at 11:48, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 11:34 +0200, Till Maas wrote: > > > On Fri October 3 2008, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > > > > > However, one of my actual point is a bit different: Once one starts > > > > formulating such a "template", people will start to nit-pick and to > > > > argue on (missing) details (e.g. corner-cases) and in longer terms will > > > > start to demand for "laws", "regulations" and "forms". > > > > > > I guess we have different pictures about such a template. For me it would be > > > an itemized list, where each item is a summary of one guideline from all the > > > Guideline documents, maybe with an URL that links to the specific guideline. > > > The nit-picking should then only affect the normal guidelines. > > > Let me put it differently: I am referring to certain particular people, > > of whom I find it very obious that they have no clue about what they are > > doing in reviews. > > Oh, how I hate such vague accusations. Ralf! Please tell us exactly who > you're referring to and what *exactly* makes you think they have no clue. I do not intend to flame people and therefore will not mention any names here. Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
