| 1 |
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Michael Palimaka |
| 2 |
<kensington@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On 12/08/15 00:29, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> I realize this is frustrating and contentious, but I think we're |
| 6 |
>> better off hashing this out, and implementing something reasonable, |
| 7 |
>> than having a bazillion different conventions that users have to deal |
| 8 |
>> with. Usually I prefer maintainer autonomy, but this is just one of |
| 9 |
>> those times it doesn't make sense. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Isn't this moving towards a situation that we used GLEP 39 to remove? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Fair enough. I don't really have a problem with the qt team proposing |
| 16 |
a policy and having QA or the Council bless it. Or having a more |
| 17 |
general policy and the QA policy is just an instance of it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Rich |
Archives