Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Re: Framework Team Page Needs Updating

2008-08-29 Thread Tom Lazar
just for the record: the way i recall things, all current members  
pretty much agreed from the start to follow up until 3.2. now it  
seems, that that, which was originally (albeit vaguely) planned for  
3.2 will be split up into 3.2 and 3.3.


i'm certainly happy to serve on the board until 3.3 and i'm looking  
forward to our meeting in dc!


cheers,

tom

On 21.08.2008, at 22:27, Andreas Zeidler wrote:


On Aug 21, 2008, at 2:31 AM, Alexander Limi wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:12:53 -0700, Andreas Zeidler [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:

hmm, i guess i must have somehow missed the discussion that lead to
that consensus (this is not meant to sound cynical or anything,  
btw).
there was some talk right after 3.1, and of course there were  
plans to

write things down in order to improve the process for the future.  i
might very well have missed parts of any more recent discussion, but
as a member of the (currently still active) 3.1 team, i'm wondering
why i don't really seem to know about this consensus.  or was it  
just

an effective one, i.e. one that sort of came up because the
discussion was never really finished?


That's what consensus means, at least in casual English.


hmm, i guess the meaning that had been stuck in my head is slightly  
different, but well... :)


To be more precise, there wasn't a we will do it this way, period  
decision, but most people seemed to think it was a good idea, and I  
didn't see anyone express strong opinions otherwise.


i did express some concerns, albeit not strong and not on the list  
(or otherwise online) either.  anyway, i think we should at least  
ask the current members if they're up for it, no?  i for one would  
happily help reviewing PLIPs again, but i won't be spokesperson  
again nor do any of the other housekeeping, like poking people,  
writing summaries and status updates etc.  that work caused quite a  
bit of stress and irritation, simply since it took a significant  
amount of extra time.  i still think we should have an extra team  
member for this, i.e. organizing the team and the reviews and making  
sure things happen in time, at least more or less...


cheers,


andi

--
zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779
pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/
plone 3.1.4 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone/

___
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team



___
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team


[Framework-Team] Re: Re: Framework Team Page Needs Updating

2008-08-20 Thread Alexander Limi
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:12:53 -0700, Andreas Zeidler  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



hmm, i guess i must have somehow missed the discussion that lead to
that consensus (this is not meant to sound cynical or anything, btw).
there was some talk right after 3.1, and of course there were plans to
write things down in order to improve the process for the future.  i
might very well have missed parts of any more recent discussion, but
as a member of the (currently still active) 3.1 team, i'm wondering
why i don't really seem to know about this consensus.  or was it just
an effective one, i.e. one that sort of came up because the
discussion was never really finished?


That's what consensus means, at least in casual English. To be more  
precise, there wasn't a we will do it this way, period decision, but  
most people seemed to think it was a good idea, and I didn't see anyone  
express strong opinions otherwise.


--
Alexander Limi · http://limi.net


___
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team