On Tue, 25 Jul 2023, Lynne wrote:
I think, however, the process has become rather opaque in this case.
Usually, there has to be a clear writeup of the issue, with all context
removed, that all parties have to agree on is presentable to the TC
for guidelines. In the past, whenever developers
>
> I think, however, the process has become rather opaque in this case.
> Usually, there has to be a clear writeup of the issue, with all context
> removed, that all parties have to agree on is presentable to the TC
> for guidelines.
>
I don't see why such a writeup is relevant, the mailing list
Jul 24, 2023, 23:27 by mar...@martin.st:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2023, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
>
>> Since you're giving zero valid reasons, I'm invoking the TC.
>>
>
> Just for public record and visibility:
>
> The TC has discussed the matter at hand. Overall, the TC considered that the
> approach
Martin Storsjo (12023-07-25):
> The TC has discussed the matter at hand.
The TC (and CC) has been elected for a year in July of 2020. That means
your mandate is two years expired. This decision is therefore not
binding.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 17 Jul 2023, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
Since you're giving zero valid reasons, I'm invoking the TC.
Just for public record and visibility:
The TC has discussed the matter at hand. Overall, the TC considered that
the approach of using an indirect call seemed tolerable given the
