Dear all, I went trough the document and it make perfectly sense to me. Just a minor comment is that we shall probably clearly specify who is responsible for the mentioned actions: call for soft, hard freeze etc. Basically who is responsible to recall all to the respect of the mentioned time-frame.
Maxi Il giorno Wed Jan 07 2015 at 2:43:33 AM Scott Mitchell <smi...@me.com> ha scritto: > Since I'm in there anyway editing a couple of minor grammatical fixes, > I've deleted that sentence based on this latest exchange plus the fact that > it makes sense to me. But I'm doing so in the comfort of knowing that my > edits can be easily reverted, so don't hesitate if there's reason. > > On Jan 6, 2015, at 05:35, Moritz Lennert <mlenn...@club.worldonline.be> > wrote: > > On 06/01/15 11:25, Martin Landa wrote: > > Hi all, > > 2014-12-30 0:29 GMT+01:00 Markus Neteler <nete...@osgeo.org>: > > I agree with Maris that no feedback should be interpreted as agreement. > > > I would also agree with that. It would be reasonable also to set some > deadline for discussion and then to propose voting. What do you think? > > > http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/RFC/4_ReleaseProcedure?action=diff&version=7&old_version=6 > > > I did cosmetics changes [1]. > > I found that a "tbd" is still there. > > > I would suggest to simply delete this sentence. Creating extra branch > for such purpose seems to be not necessary to me. Any opinion on that? > > > +1 > > Moritz > > _______________________________________________ > grass-psc mailing list > grass-...@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc > > > _______________________________________________ > grass-psc mailing list > grass-...@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
