Oh, here I go... On Wednesday 10 March 2004 16.21, Alfons Adriaensen wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 03:59:18PM +0100, Robert Jonsson wrote: > > Richards decision would rely on the fact that LAD is in agreement, don't > > you think? > > Yes. But define 'LAD in agreement' (Robert) or 'what we agree on (Steve)'.
In this case I would say that silence == no-vote. And that the guys debating must set their differences aside and find a solution. No spec is ever perfect, besides, this is mainly about open source, if the new spec won't fit the bill an uproar will occur and it will be revised to 1.2.1, the old spec will be swiftly passed on to neverneverland. I don't know enough about this so I'm definitely a yay sayer either way it goes. > > To me this means there is no formal approval procedure. This is an open community... formality isn't a strong point ;) > > Anyway this has beem debated for more than week, I've answered all > objections in some way or another and this has cost me an enormous amount > of time and energy, so unless some really new point is raised, I will now > shut up. My proposal stands as it is. I understand how you feel, lots of energy here during the last week. It's easy to have strong opinions about something you know a lot about... I've been there and done my part of argumentation in similar situations. As you probably know new revisions of ladspa has been up on the list before, I must say I find it a bit sad that none of these discussions seem to actually finalize into a new LADSPA revision. I really feel that you guys need to find some common ground, we need some progress. As they say in the military; faced with a situation, doing nothing is the worst thing you can do. Sorry for stepping on toes, but I'd hate for a good opportunity to fade away once again. Kind regards, Robert
