John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please, MJ. This has NO PLACE on an SPI list. I'm a Debian developer and > *I* don't even care. Take it to Debian.
Sorry for getting distracted by the specifics and ad-hominems again. I already took the relevant bits away and I posted a link earlier http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2008/03/msg00065.html [...] > > What is unreasonable is making up new rules to claim a simple question > > was forbidden or invalid because only one of SPI members asked. > > That's just dicking people around with bureaucracy IMO. > > What new rule? It's been long established how SPI deals with member > projects. Each member project has a defined way of interacting with SPI. > And you are not it. Any new rule that only member projects can ask after "their" SPI tasks. I'm not a member project and I'm not asking SPI to deal with a member project or start a new task for it. I'm simply asking what SPI thinks is the current status of a task it seems to have left open. That seems to be forthcoming, so I repeat:- > > As pointed out previously, a past DPL was involved and one of the SPI > > board is asking the current DPL for the current view. Please let's > > wait for that and see how the DPL election plays out (two candidates > > have different types of web work as part of their platforms so far, > > which seems a good reason to vote for them) and keep further flames > > off this list. Thanks, -- MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 - Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ - Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ _______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
