On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Allan McRae <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:allan@archlinux.org">allan@archlinux.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">kludge wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
what i see is not folks trying to develop a plan of action that suits<br>
the needs of all stake-holders. &nbsp;i see a few personalities trying to<br>
impose their agendas by winning arguments. (greg *cough* allan *cough*<br>
loui *cough*) please y&#39;all, consider the possibility that *your*<br>
brilliant idea may not be the *only* brilliant idea out there.<br>
 &nbsp;<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
For sure, but I have yet to see any other idea proposed apart from &quot;do nothing&quot;. &nbsp;And what I have put forward for the vote is very much appeasing others concerns. &nbsp;e.g. no current packages being for to be removed due to not passing the new criteria.<br>
<font color="#888888">
<br>
Allan<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>Two short comments Allan;<br><br>1 - I have made a few other ideas known in my emails. And there have been others as well.<br><br>2 - You even addressed one of these other ideas in a chat with me on the TU&#39;s irc channel. As I recall you said you did not like asking for funds (fundraising) IF there should be a need for improved resources in the future. &lt;- Of course the real issue is that regardless of how much your proposal might reduce hard drive loading (for instance), eventually the hard drive will fill up anyways. Then, if you are NOT prepared to raise or otherwise garner funds to replace it, you end up needing to trim even more packages from the repo. (And yes you and I discussed this as well on the TU&#39;s irc channel this past week.)<br>
<br>Bob FInch<br>