On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 09:20:37PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 09:51:32PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > i now release the call for vote, and ask for a vote to be held with the > > original proposal from Frederik, which has had enough seconds since August > > 31. > > As a point of order, the original proposal from Frederik was superseded once > he accepted Manoj's amendment, and several of the seconders of the original > proposal also seconded the amended proposal, indicating their acceptance of > the amendment. Under the constitution, this means the proposal must get a > new proposer and the seconds must be re-established in order to have a > formal proposal.
Yeah, i know, Manoj told that. I wonder why it is not possible to keep the old proposal ongoing, the same way a seconder can retake a proposal the original proposer retire, not sure this makes sense. That said, i consider that this proposal currently under vote is not a good one, that i have been wronged when i agreed to delay the original call to vote on the DPLs urging, since it is clear that all the effort i have done is now showed in the trashcan, since we are voting on Manoj's proposal, which will mean we have to get ride of a number of firmwares, among them the tg3 firmware, which is contrary to the result of the kernel team position statement and will. Frederik i don't understand why you did let that happen, and why you didn't at least second the proposal we worked on together. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
