+1 on no biding peer review But the sequence of events Pier suggested seems fine
(1) The volunteer list editors post submissions to the general list and copy their own DEV list. [NEWS] July 2002 - Struts <copy/> (2) The volunteer newsletter editor collects the submissions together and sends it out on announcements like a digest. If there were comments, it would be up to the newsletter editor that month to decide whether to commit them to the newsletter or not; perhaps consulting with the committers for the product first. -Ted. Peter Donald wrote: > > I would actually prefer no peer review (or at least no binding peer > review). If people want to have a say what goes into it then they should > get off their butts and write something for it ;) > > I am sure that the writers will be at responsible enough (and if not we can > yank > their privlidges to post it to announcement list) > > At 04:19 PM 6/5/2002 +0100, you wrote: > >"Rob Oxspring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Jakarta Newsletter > > > ================== > > > Issue: 0 > > > Date: May 2002 > > > >Great job... I'd like to propose the following: peer review on this mailing > >list, vote request, and then send it off on announcements... This can be > >done every month if Rob is willing to keep up with the pace of my flamewars. > > > > Pier > > > > > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY US -- Developing Java Web Applications with Struts -- Tel: +1 585 737-3463 -- Web: http://husted.com/about/services -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
