Re: DFSG v2 Draft #5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 25-Jan-99 David Welton wrote:
> Would it be prudent at this juncture to start discussing why we will
> vote against this? Or do people whish to finalize the format before
> we discuss why we think it should be voted down?
Ummm... I suppose you could if you want to.. but I'd rather wait, personally,
until the format has been finalized... I'll probably ignore any statment that
was blatant "absolute no" and not "maybe, just maybe if" until after the formal
proposal...
There are enough people who *do* want the change that I think the vote would be
benificial if, for no other reason, than to settle the issue once and for all
so I'd rather put my energy into getting to that vote, first, before spending
any on convincing people to vote for or against it when it's done.
=========================================================================
* http://benham.net/index.html <>< *
* -------------------- * -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- ---------------*
* Darren Benham * Version: 3.1 *
* <gecko@benham.net> * GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++*
* KC7YAQ * E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- *
* Debian Developer * PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ *
* <gecko@debian.org> * G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ *
* -------------------- * ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------*
=========================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBNqw3f7bps1lIfUYBAQEZFwP6A7s96I8EYxUKwrb9IMD39RuFTG9hHopa
dJB4+ofj7mn2VaGq3wa/vB1xA3hb29BlgrzBHKgDVHlK4CJ+PY7HO/fmjt4HfY1F
hKDNH5bs7KgZVbiCNCpxZ+M9mMPsE0dGnOAHo4bBKC5sh0XntTxlwU6+kQxgIB3P
PlP/Emeu0sE=
=pJTV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: