I'd even settle for winter. I can wear a coat, if necessary.
Carrying an effective AC is far less practical, to say nothing of the
extension cord...
-=R
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Roberto Peon wrote:
> > I'd just prefer a
I'd just prefer a venue where we had temps in the various
conference/meeting rooms and facilities which were reliably below 80
degrees Fahrenheit.
I looked around a number of times while in various meetings, and a large
number of people were sweating (including myself).
-=R
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013
I didn't know we had a leader. I though we were an autonomous collective!
Seriously though, editing for language is something we could take off the
shoulders of technical editors at least part of the time.
I'd want for them (and maybe chairs+ADs) to be the ones using such a
resource, should it exi
No disagreement. It is merely *a* way, and, popping back to the original
topic, it is better to allow the submission and deny the visibility than to
disallow the submission
-=R
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:22 PM, David Morris wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2013, Roberto Peon wrote:
>
>
I think you mean backup solution, source control won't help on its own :)
-=R
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 3/4/13 2:53 PM, Roberto Peon wrote:
> > There was a fire in the office, three de
There was a fire in the office, three desks away from mine last week during
the weekend. Sprinklers came on.
If my computer had either caught fire, or been exposed to too much water
(luckily neither happened) the draft would have been lost.
I still fail to see why the solution is to ban *submissio
+1
In any case, the proposal as I understood it was that the deadline *would*
apply to drafts which the secretariat had to examine, just not the rest.
I certainly don't agree with giving an unsupportable load to our
secretariat before the meetings (and it isn't being proposed by me :) )
-=R
On
I'm doing a lot of work in regards to, creating working code, benchmarking,
testing, writing specs and prose, writing emails, wash, rinse, repeat, and
yes, the deadline is interfering with the publishing of the work-product of
all of that and likely the progress of the group.
... and what is the b
2013 at 2:59 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
>
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Roberto Peon wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure that the deadline serves any positive purpose so long as we
> keep all of the versions anyway.
> > It certainly is annoying the way it is now and is disrupt
I'm not sure that the deadline serves any positive purpose so long as we
keep all of the versions anyway.
It certainly is annoying the way it is now and is disruptive to the
development process rather than helpful for it.
-=R
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
> On 2/26/13 1:
There are obviously orthogonal problems here.
If we were doing this as code, these would be separate functions and most
everyone would agree that it would make both testing and understanding
easier.
Why is it different with specs? The hardest part of specs is choosing which
one is right. The secon
11 matches
Mail list logo
