On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Seth Arnold wrote: > True enough; other open source projects don't usually have too much > trouble with the particulars though. Like you said, the sort-of lives we > may or may not have tend to interfere. I have, on reliable authority, that this project is somewhat unique in its approach. I applaud this, and see that a unique problem like we're attempting to address requires unique solutions, as well as unique methods. A venture into "social engineering" like this one deserves some consideration of the how to to get to conclusion, how to define what a "consensus" really is, and how to provide a basis for discussions in the light of the project goals. Many open source projects just "eject" people who don't agree with the views of a few central individuals. I'm not sure how to get there, but Crispin's comments at the top of this thread suggest there may be room for definition, at this point. HE suggested a one-day review period. You seem to agree with me that it may be inadequate in some circumstances. What circumstances? This is a truely cosmic conundrum, but a first-order answer is probably better than none. > > Cheers :) > Salut! J. Melvin Jones |>------------------------------------------------------ || J. MELVIN JONES jmjonesat_private |>------------------------------------------------------ || Microcomputer Systems Consultant || Software Developer || Web Site Design, Hosting, and Administration || Network and Systems Administration |>------------------------------------------------------ || http://www.jmjones.com/ |>------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jul 23 2001 - 18:21:28 PDT