-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Dec 7, 2005, at 4:29 PM, Heikki Toivonen wrote:
I am not so sure we can eliminate the sheriff completely, but if I can be proven wrong I would be happy. It also seems like nobody is disagreeing that we need sheriff currently because the tools are what they are.
Actually, I don't think that we agreed on this point, which might account for the heat generated in this thread. Before today's message I saw one message in favor of sheriff's (Philippe) and one message not in favor of sheriff's. I don't view that as a conclusive indicator of either agreement or disagreement. I think that this got enacted too quickly.
Not much that can be done about that now, but something to be aware of in the future.
But since one wanted out: are there others who don't want to help out with sheriff duties while we improve the tools?
Since it is important for the tinderboxes to stay green as much as possible, and since there seems to be an abundance of volunteers to work on the tools, I'm willing to act as a sheriff until the tools get fixed. I think that we should all try to take additional care while the tools get fixed.
Ted -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQFDl5HOvrorh/X8S0IRArr7AKCPIklf0E82aHA0HVZYUHVu8UTEyACePZ18 y2CBHbOW5CO0J3gljpmPe6g= =5LJI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
