On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 10:57:06PM +0100, Sander Striker wrote: >... > Ken, could you please bring the interpretation differences that > you and OtherBill have to the list, so that we can reach a consensus > on that?
I'd say make it OtherBill's job. Ken has a solution, albeit hacky, to a problem. OtherBill doesn't like it, so let him describe an alternative solution which can be done. [ OtherBill doesn't have to totally solve it, but at least explain enough of an alternative such that somebody can implement the thing; I don't see a way to do it "Right" without breaking half the planet ] I don't like the hack either, but it does solve a problem. And we cannot and should not use vetoes to knock down product design issues. Technical problems, certainly, but not "I don't like that feature, so I'm gonna veto the thing." Product features and changes *are* subject to majority vote, however, which is why Ken is operating under a (lazy) consensus model. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
