On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 01:51PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would not be in favor of formal process to bless (or not) tweets on the > > "official" handle for this project. In fact I vetoed this notion when it > > came up for a vote on private@. Disagreements are never actually settled > > with process and red tape. > > I'm very strongly agreeing with the above. Like I said in a different thread, > the fact that creds are now shared make it all a moot point as far as > I'm concerned. > > If somebody on a PMC feels strongly about a particular tweet -- deleting is > now > an option. That of course, would require monitoring the account, but hey! > that's > a definition of actually caring.
Strong +1 as well. It's like Commit-Then-Review process. If there are issues with a commit - it's either get reversed or corrected in the subsequent commits. The same amount of monitoring is involved. That'd be simple and no additional bickering will ensue around the policy setting. I'd rather spend my time on 1.0 release, which would benefit dramatically from the contributors, but not the massive pontification. Cos
