[GRASS-PSC] RFC1 vote reminder

Michael Barton michael.barton at asu.edu
Thu Mar 29 19:25:07 EDT 2007


OK. We were asked to vote by a certain date before. This time I'll wait
until everyone is done with modifying this. Please someone announce when it
REALLY is ready for a vote. I'll look at it again then.

Michael


On 3/29/07 4:16 PM, "Brad Douglas" <rez at touchofmadness.com> wrote:

> 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
> 

__________________________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University

phone: 480-965-6213
fax: 480-965-7671
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton





More information about the grass-psc mailing list