| 1 |
On Sunday, January 15, 2017 10:15:32 PM JST, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 7:58 AM, Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> It seems the developer community at large may need to revisit and vote on |
| 5 |
>> such a change for GLEP39. Assuming it is deemed important |
| 6 |
>> enough to pursue. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Nobody is going to organize such an action over a matter this trivial. |
| 10 |
> I'm not saying they can't, just that I'd be shocked if it happened. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> And hence my point that deciding not to take any action is effectively |
| 13 |
> a decision that leads are not necessary, since nobody is empowered to |
| 14 |
> actually do anything over the lack of a lead. And that suits me fine |
| 15 |
> anyway. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> I did clearly state that I didn't think the Council should change the |
| 18 |
> wording of GLEP39. It would merely clarify what it means. And |
| 19 |
> obviously it would take into account any opinions expressed by the |
| 20 |
> developer community at large. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I am not really sure what all the fluff is about, but I simply asked a yes |
| 24 |
or no question. More plainly, do you really think the council has |
| 25 |
jurisdiction over GLEP39? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> On a side note, I think there is far too much tendency in these |
| 28 |
> debates to hold ourselves to decisions made a long time ago by |
| 29 |
> entirely different people. When big issues come up people ask |
| 30 |
> questions like "what did those people who only a few of us even have |
| 31 |
> ever talked to mean when they wrote xyz" or "what would Daniel do" and |
| 32 |
> so on. While sometimes understanding historical perspective can be |
| 33 |
> useful I don't consider ourselves bound by it. Ultimately how we |
| 34 |
> govern ourselves today is up to the developers of today. |
| 35 |
> |
Archives