On Monday 10 March 2008 13:15, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Magnus,
>
> > It was also presented as the solution that -core agreed on. I'm sure that
> > if Josh actually lied about that, someone would've spoken up quite fast.
> > But I strongly doubt that Josh would claim to present the "view of the
> > core team" if the discussion hadn't taken place.
>
> Heh. As if I could get away with that -- I'd have until list lag caught
> up to get blasted.
>
> I guess one of the questions here is "who owns the contributor
> listings?". It's not a question we've ever dealt with specifically
> before, and it's unclear on even what *mailing list* would be involved
> in discussing them. It seems like we'd need to involve half or more of
> the lists.
>
> For the last 3 years, nobody has discussed this because Robert just did
> it and submitted the list to Core, which approved it. Now Robert is
> tired of the work, and what was implicit needs to become explicit.
>
To be clear, I didn't get tired of the work, I actually enjoyed the work
(making sure others get recognition for thier efforts was a highlight for
me). What I did get tired of was that everytime I went to update the list
some yaywho would pipe up with yet another scheme to redraw the entire
listing.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL