[GRASS-PSC] RFC1 vote reminder

[Brad Douglas]

I would say yes as it's already been addressed peripherally[1].  The old
vote is no longer relevant.  Maybe it should go into the RFC?  I still
need to review the changes, but the quoted text below is very
encouraging.  I've been away for about a week and have much to catch up
on.

I also don't think it's a good idea to vote for an unratified RFC before
the changes are committed.  Commit first, then vote to avoid any
potential confusion in wording.  Once the it is ratified, then only
changes need be voted on (before commit?), not the entire document.

[1] http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass-psc/2007-March/000232.html

On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 10:17 -0700, Michael Barton wrote:
> Do we need to vote again?
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> On 3/29/07 10:14 AM, "Scott Mitchell" <smitch at mac.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 23-Mar-07, at 04:49 , Hamish wrote:
> > 
> >> Hamish:
> >>>>> - Specifiying our HQ is ITC(or modern equivalent) is a good thing.
> >> Paul:
> >>>> Yes I think I didn't read Scott's proposal well enough. I wasn't
> >>>> aware that we were deleting the explicit mention of the IRST
> >>>> institute.
> >> Markus:
> >>> Now we are mentioning Intevation without link to the CVS and
> >>> the Web site link without institute - looks a bit unbalanced.
> >> 
> >> propsed changes to RFC1:  (see attached patch)
> >> 
> >> # revert the ITC->CVS+website change & update irst's name. I think
> >> that's as clear as we need to be about who we are. (the cvs may be
> >> the heart, but it isn't the whole)
> > ...
> >> # grounds for removal from CVS write access: as currently worded the
> >> only reason is for removal is violating the SUBMITTING guidelines.
> >> 
> > ...
> > 
> >> other than those changes, I am happy with RFC1 and ready to vote in
> >> favour of it.
> > 
> > I agree with Hamish's summary and solution.  I have patched my own
> > copy and was ready to commit it to CVS but got commit-shy, given my
> > own role in creating confusion in our initial attempts at this.  But
> > we seem to have stalled again, so here I am.
> > 
> > If I get a little more positive reinforcement, I'll go ahead and
> > commit, and if I read the consensus right, we will not only be ready
> > to vote, many will be happy to get it over with, considering they
> > already voted!  I think we would have to start again, even with
> > everyone's best intentions in the past, for proper process,
> > especially since this is to properly establish the PSC.
> > 
> > So - should I go ahead and commit and re-call the vote, or ... ?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Scott


-- 
Brad Douglas <rez touchofmadness com>                    KB8UYR/6
Address: 37.493,-121.924 / WGS84    National Map Corps #TNMC-3785