On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 06:37:53PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > First, the "Debian Maintainers" concept [..] > My best summary of Joerg's objections are: [..] > - it's taking over some of the DAM role (in principle if not > precisely in practice) so should be done with DAM's approval and > support [..] > So, the reason I call it a "GR concept" is that I think a reasonable > approach would be to work out a "concrete plan" over the next few weeks, > and hopefully come up with something that has a demonstrable consensus > behind it, rather than just a pushy DPL candidate, a couple of cabal > members, or whatever. Whatever happens, it won't be perfect, but surely > we can think of and implement *something* better than what we've currently > got within a few weeks.
I love the DM idea.
I don't understand why you want a GR for it though. Don't you just want
to flesh out a proposal that the DAMs will approve of and work with you
and others on?
Simon.
--
oOoOo "Do they teach lawyers to apologise, because you suck at oOoOo
oOoOo it?" -- Erin Brockovich. oOoOo
oOoOo oOoOo
htag.pl 0.0.22 ::::::: http://www.earth.li/~huggie/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
