On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:51:37 +0000, Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> This time can we _please_ try to get quorum ? You must send in your
> vote within 7 days of me sending this message, for it to count, ie by
> approximately 2007-12-06 19:50 +0000.
-8> -
> 1. RFC3484 s6 rule 9 should not be applied to IPv4 addresses by
> Debian systems, and we DO overrule the maintainer.
> 2. RFC3484 s6 rule 9 should not be applied to IPv6 addresses by
> Debian systems. We do NOT overrule the maintainer.
> 3. We recommend to the IETF that RFC3484 s6 rule 9 should be
> abolished for IPv4, and that it should be reconsidered for IPv6.
-8> -
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
[1] Choice X: Do not use rule 9, overrule maintainer, etc., as above.
[3] Choice S: Sort IPv4 addrs according to rule 9 in getaddrinfo
[4] Choice M: Leave the choice up to the maintainers.
[2] Choice F: Further discussion
-=-=-=-=-=- Don't Delete Anything Between These Lines =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
As I have mentioned before, I think we should be deciding an
issue purely on its merits; and how egregious the error is should not
count towards determining what the correct solution is. If our
deliberations conclude that a maintainer is incorrect, well, that is
what we concluded. Everyone makes mistakes.
manoj
--
Whip me. Beat me. Make me maintain AIX. Stephan Zielinski
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
pgpNKbzXcDsJD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
