Roland Mainz wrote: > Garret, would you accept the "truce" and remove the "de-rail", please ?
I think you're confused about the process that's in use in the ARC. "De-rail" does not in any way mean "deny." In fact, it doesn't even mean that there's anything wrong with the proposed project. I've even derailed my *own* projects. What "derail" means -- in ARC terms -- is one of the following: - that at least some of the reviewers think that a written ARC opinion is needed. or: - that some reviewers think that the project either isn't as "obvious" or "simple" as is required for a formal fast-track request. The effect of "derailing" is that (a) the fast-track timer is stopped, (b) the case turns into a full review, and (c) the ARC member who derailed is now the case owner and is on the hook to write the ARC's opinion. It's certainly not an indictment of your work, and if you read it that way, you're just going to get yourself (and others!) frustrated for no reason whatsoever. No "truce" is needed here, because there's no "battle." Please. Take a breath. Perhaps two. And then think about replying again. -- James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <carlsonj at workingcode.com>
