On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:27:39PM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote: > Jon Portnoy wrote: [Mon Apr 03 2006, 06:52:33PM CDT] > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 07:35:52PM -0400, Aron Griffis wrote: > > > Clearly this sentence states that Infra has usurped the suspension > > > process. It's very disappointing since Devrel has put so much work > > > into a process that has been demoted to "recommendation" status. > > > > > > > You mean the broken policy.xml everyone wants to replace? > > That's rather unfair. Yes, you and many others want to replace it. I > think it is fair to say that many other people think it was a good, if > imperfect, start. >
They can think what they like, I think anyone actually trying to get anything accomplished under it would disagree that it's a good start (unless you're the offender, then it's great since it takes ages for devrel to even start thinking about actually addressing the problem). Ask some of the devrel guys working on this case what they think of current policy > > I agree some of the wording should be altered, but I do think it's > > sensible for infra to cover when devrel falls on its rear. > > Of course, it is possible that rational people might disagree that such > an event has happened here. > I don't think I said it had yet. -- Jon Portnoy avenj/irc.freenode.net -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
