> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 9:41 PM
> Daniel Quinlan writes: > > Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > FYI: I reverted the change. r22977. > > > > I would have reverted the change if asked and I was anticipating a > > vote rather than being reverted. I don't think we need to revert > > changes on procedural grounds. > > Procedurally, Theo's correct to do that -- it *is* R-T-C, and > it should not be committed, even if there's a vote in > progress on that change. Butting in: it would have been a bit nicer on Dan's toes if a simple email was sent: "Remember we are in R-T-C...", instead of the instant revert. I'm sure we all agree that people are more important than dry procedure ;). > But voting-wise: > > +1 on the change. Sander
