[fdo-internals] FDO RFC 4 - Provider Support for ArcSDE 9.2

[Jason Birch]

+1
 
I think that email should be the preferred means for these motions.  That way there is a "permanent" record.  If the motion is brought by IRC, the results should be circulated by email, and anyone not attending should have an opportunity to veto.
 
Jason

________________________________

From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org on behalf of Greg Boone
Subject: RE: [fdo-internals] FDO RFC 4 - Provider Support for ArcSDE 9.2

Is it possible to have the PSC vote on this issue via the 'internals'
email list? If so, I propose that RFC 4 be formally accepted by the PSC
and implemented.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3732 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20070423/7cffa102/attachment.bin