On Mon, 16 Mar 2009, Ceri Davies wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 08:13:56PM +0100, Martin Bochnig wrote: >> SUN (not you Valerie, nor many others on this list, but the general >> philosophy!!! > > I don't work for Sun :) > > My point was that the Constitution already fully addresses the issue > raised in this thread but mainly that if we wanted to be nitpickers > about it then the whole process is in trouble. Since it's > clearly non-obvious the implication was that we could afford to be a > little flexible if deemed appropriate. > > I'm sorry we aren't having more fun too.
Hi Ceri & Martin - If I understand what you're saying is that you think the OGB should be loose in this intepretation of this particular requirement. I agree, but it will clearly be in the advantage of Dan Roberts and Pedro Gracia to supply their statements so folks will know something about them before the election completes. Valerie -- Valerie Fenwick, http://blogs.sun.com/bubbva Solaris Security Technologies, Developer, Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, Menlo Park, CA, 94025.
