>>>>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2012, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 09:09:10AM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Actually, my plan was not only to discuss 2?, but to vote on it in
>> the same meeting.
> No point in jumping the gun. Frankly considering the issues of the
> various proposals haven't really been fully fleshed out up until
> that wiki page (prior, they were at best in PM authors heads),
Right, but at least I won't "fully flesh out" all five of them (not
counting variants), if it's clear that four of these five are for the
dustbin. Refining each of them to the level that's appropriate for a
GLEP or for inclusion in PMS means quite some work.
I'd rather see the vote at the next meeting as a recommendation that
such or such proposal should be worked out in detail. Meaning one of
the proposals if there's a clear majority, or maybe two if the
decision is split. The council would need to vote on it again for its
> and that's not counting the level of misunderstandings people had
> about it (and likely still do). I'd rather see people properly
> consider it rather than try to fit it into a single council meeting.
We should of course assume that council members will be prepared and
consider it before the meeting. ;-) Certainly it wouldn't be very
efficient use of the time if all details of the different proposals
would have to be explained during the meeting.