On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 06:59:41PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> On Sun May 10 18:34, Luk Claes wrote:
> > > 3. Option X overrides a foundation document, possibly temporarily (?)
> >
> > Not possible. You can only override a decision and amending a foundation
> > document is the previous option.
On Tue May 12 17:06, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > What would you call the vote to ship non-free software in etch? Because
> > that is what I mean. We are agreeing to do something which the
> > foundation document said we would not, but only for a certain period of
> > time (etch).
> >
> > I don't _c
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 17:06 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> I think this is the core of the disagreement. I do not call it a
> temporary override of a foundation document; I call it a temporary
> practical consensus between "the needs of our users" and "the needs of
> the free software community".
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 17:06 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
>> I think this is the core of the disagreement. I do not call it a
>> temporary override of a foundation document; I call it a temporary
>> practical consensus between "the needs of our users" and "the needs of
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 01:25:53AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Quoting the mail fully for the added recipients. Looks like Charles was
> too shy to do so.
Thanks. I only follow -project sporadically.
> Charles Plessy (12/05/2009):
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I am getting quite confused after read
5 matches
Mail list logo