a plea

[Chris DiBona]

That's okay, alternate chris-persons weren't confused as to whose
incredibly reasonable response you were replying to.

Chris

On 9/13/07, Grayg Ralphsnyder <wgrayg at mountain.net> wrote:
> 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     2) a previously submitted license/revision is being withdrawn;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
> >
> > .
> >
>


-- 
Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
Google's Open Source program can be found at http://code.google.com
Personal Weblog: http://dibona.com