Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> No, I think that was the right time to make a decision. Before that
>> things were in a great state of flux. My suggestion is that there
>> should be some minimum time (I suggested 6 weeks to 2 months) between
>> when the decision is made/announced and the actual freeze date. In
>> the present case we would have probably have ended up with a date
>> very like what we now have, but without the June 1 false start, which
>> many (including me) felt tried to set the date too early and gave
>> insufficient notice to those who wanted to make the cut.
>
>
> Except, as some have already mentioned, the June 1st "false start" as
> you put it, was never a surprise ... *shrug*
>
>
We've been aropund this block already, so I'm not going to continue. If
you think the process is working just fine then don't change it. I
don't, but then I am not in a position to make the decisions.
cheers
andrew