| 1 |
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:22:07 -0500 Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Mon Oct 10 2005, 04:43:19PM CDT] |
| 4 |
| > Isn't the idea that someone writes out a draft GLEP and gets it |
| 5 |
| > discussed on -dev (and repeats said process until everyone is happy |
| 6 |
| > with the GLEP) *before* pushing things to the council? |
| 7 |
| |
| 8 |
| I disagree, but only very slightly. I never expected everybody to be |
| 9 |
| happy before a GLEP is voted upon, but a GLEP should address areas of |
| 10 |
| controversy and either incorporate the new ideas or explain why the |
| 11 |
| authors do not wish to do so. In this way the folks voting on the |
| 12 |
| GLEP are able to make a more informed decision. See GLEP 40 for an |
| 13 |
| example. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I see the number of objections raised regarding GLEP 40 as a sign that |
| 16 |
it needs rewriting, not a sign that it should be pushed to voting... |
| 17 |
Perhaps making everyone happy is impossible, but equally there |
| 18 |
shouldn't be huge amounts of unhappiness... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) |
| 22 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 23 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives