a plea

[Grayg Ralphsnyder]

aggg ... I meant Chris Travers ...

Grayg Ralphsnyder wrote:
> I agree with Chris, there are a lot of arms and legs that are relevant 
> to the main body / topic.  Possibly modifying the message subject line 
> with a hyphen and a word or two to describe the sub-point or 
> supporting argument, etc.  Then those that do not want to read the 
> 'off-topic' materials can just delete them.
>
> grayg ralphsnyder
>
> Chris Travers wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 9/10/07, *Scott Shattuck* <Scott.Shattuck at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:Scott.Shattuck at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     +10000
>>
>>
>>     I might even go so far as to suggest that only messages specifically
>>     relevant to the following points be acceptable:
>>
>>     1) a new license or license revision is being submitted;
>>     2) a previously submitted license/revision is being withdrawn;
>>     3) a submitted license is being questioned relative to conformance
>>     with a specific OSI clause
>>
>>
>> How can these be addressed without discussing sub-points, supporting 
>> arguments, etc? Wouldn't your proposal provide for approval of 
>> licenses with less understanding of what they actually mean? Is that 
>> a good thing?
>>
>>
>> Best Wishes,
>> Chris Travers
>
> .
>