Thanks Donald. Your timing is good. I just reviewed and commented on the maintainer doc.
I suggested: - explicitly allowing an individual to play multiple roles in the project (IMO we're not big enough to exclude this) - adding the role of 'git master' which uses the text from Vincent's Maintainer section. - asked if acked-based patch acceptance is required vs time based Lou On 6/22/2016 12:48 PM, Donald Sharp wrote: > Lou - > > You are correct, I jumped the gun a little bit. We need to provide > time for people to vote on the document.. Please take the time to > read the document and let us know how you would like to proceed. > > Additionally I'll move the CE part back to the Quagga Release Process > docuemnt. > > thanks! > > donald > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Lou Berger <[email protected]> wrote: >> Paul, >> >> While the conclusion to work on ce may (or may not, I wasn't on the call for >> this) be premature, why can't a branch just be added under the existing repo >> if/when that's the consensus among the community? >> >> Lou >> >> >> >> On June 22, 2016 5:53:34 AM Paul Jakma <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016, Donald Sharp wrote: >>> >>>> Discussion on where to do the work next. quagga-ce on github or on a >>>> branch in Savannah. Decision was to start immediately working on a CE >>>> branch on github. >>> >>> You need to change the name though. >>> >>> regards, >>> -- >>> Paul Jakma | [email protected] | @pjakma | Key ID: 0xD86BF79464A2FF6A >>> Fortune: >>> Getting the job done is no excuse for not following the rules. >>> >>> Corollary: >>> Following the rules will not get the job done. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Quagga-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
