Simon Phipps wrote: > Sounds a device calculated to lead to an early "no" vote to me - reminds > me of an earlier controversy.
And this sounds like exactly the same argument that you tried to use in that case to avoid bringing the issue to some sort of resolution, and as a result it rumbled on and on. If I was being suspicious I'd say that your position is a device calculated to avoid putting an issue to the vote that you suspect it might go the 'wrong way' - but I'm sure I am maligning you, in which case you have my profuse apologies. But then again, accusing me of wanting to bias the vote when I've stated that I will support whatever decision the OGB and/or community seems slightly unfair too. > While developing a proposal now is a positive thing to do, I suggest > waiting until closer to when we actually need a decision (which would be > the middle of next year) before we try to crystalise a veto like that. > We may find our attitudes have changed. If they haven't - well, fair > enough. No. We need a decision before then. 2 weeks may be too short, 6 months is way too long. -- Alan Burlison -- _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
