Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Arun Raghavan <ford_prefect@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Council manifesto of sping
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:25:08
Message-Id: AANLkTimQr__39f1bmfIknlXVayPvh76C3P1qcY22VpC0@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Council manifesto of sping by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On 22 June 2010 15:32, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote:
2 > Arun Raghavan posted on Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:43:42 +0530 as excerpted:
3 >
4 >> b) For questions like "- Should Python 3.x be stable?", isn't that for
5 >> team leads to decide? And for the council to resolve in case of
6 >> conflicts?
7 >
8 > Wouldn't the point for specifically pointing out python 3.x as an example,
9 > that there is in fact quite some conflict on it, as demonstrated by the
10 > threads discussing it right here?  If I'm not mistaken, sping has in fact
11 > mentioned that as an example in his "tone" thread, as well.  If I read him
12 > correctly, the implication is that before it got to the level it did,
13 > council should have voted on it, thus providing a final answer, as an
14 > alternative to the simmering level of discontent that's not quite at the
15 > boiling over point, that we seem to have with the situation now.  He does,
16 > after all, make a strong statement in favor of an "activist" council.
17
18 I did say questions like this one, not only this one.
19
20 Also, the context of that quote was from the bit of the manifesto that
21 advocates putting such questions to a global vote, which is what I was
22 enquiring about.
23
24 Cheers,
25 --
26 Arun Raghavan
27 http://arunraghavan.net/
28 (Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)