Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [Tue Dec 13 2005, 02:43:42PM CST] > I object. You're changing the GLEP process, and the way that that's > done is through another GLEP. Otherwise we'll end up with people > writing GLEPs following GLEP 1, and not realising that GLEP 1 is no > longer how things work. > > Doing things properly wouldn't be difficult here. GLEP 43 took less > than half an hour. It's worth doing it for the sake of not confusing > future GLEP authors.
Okay, I'll acquiesce to the call for a GLEP. It seems a tad extravagant, since I'll be the one approving it, but I can agree that having the change documented would be useful. -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76
pgpwHiBPFT5Es.pgp
Description: PGP signature
