Jody Garnett ha scritto: > Well I personally like Andrea being happy; so sure let us go earlier. > However I think as the Australian's get up to speed we will need to go > with a two meeting system again; or perhaps tone the meetings down to a > development meeting; and save policy and improvement proposals for email.
Probably both of them. IRC is good for discussion, and we want to log the results. Sure, the #geoserver channel is now logged (http://irc.geoserver.org/log/) but who's going to read all of the logs? A couple specific times when hard questions get discussed and logged for others to read are still good. Using the ml for voting, not sure. For sure a proposal should not be presented and voted in the same meeting, because it leaves no time for discussion and thinking, but voting during the meeting has the distinctive advantage that people have to vote right there, so we are sure voting occurs, with the mail storm we have on the two ml, someone may loose the thread. The ml also has the nasty side effect of mixing votes and more discussion togheter. A separate ml for GSIP would be clearer, but it would be one more darned list to which everybody interested in GeoServer development has to be subscribed. At least the discussion should be kept on geoserver-devel... do we want a ml setup only for voting? Cheers Andrea ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
