Hello all,
I agree that Kuno's option #2 seems the most appropriate. But to take in
account Andrew's point why we just don't state that the new rule apply only
to new entries and that the old records using FAS will not be edited before
enough time has been spent and why not some plugins-option
On 8 May 2011 12:38, Samuel Barbaud s...@lectrum.eu wrote:
Hello all,
I agree that Kuno's option #2 seems the most appropriate. But to take in
account Andrew's point why we just don't state that the new rule apply only
to new entries and that the old records using FAS will not be edited
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes
gnu_and...@member.fsf.org wrote:
On 8 May 2011 12:38, Samuel Barbaud s...@lectrum.eu wrote:
Hello all,
I agree that Kuno's option #2 seems the most appropriate. But to take in
account Andrew's point why we just don't state that the new
So now what ?
Is there a formal decision process to decide what we're doing and change the
FAS Style Guide (or keeping it as is) ?
To be honest I would also be OK with #1 although I think #2 is better. But
in any case I would love to know what will be the rule once NGS is live.
--
2011/5/8 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren reosare...@gmail.com:
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes
gnu_and...@member.fsf.org wrote:
On 8 May 2011 12:38, Samuel Barbaud s...@lectrum.eu wrote:
Hello all,
I agree that Kuno's option #2 seems the most appropriate. But to take in
On 8 May 2011 18:39, Samuel Barbaud s...@lectrum.eu wrote:
So now what ?
Is there a formal decision process to decide what we're doing and change the
FAS Style Guide (or keeping it as is) ?
To be honest I would also be OK with #1 although I think #2 is better. But
in any case I would love
