Re: Internal LAST CALL

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz (Shmuel+gen@patriot.net)
Date: Tue May 07 2002 - 12:06:09 CDT


In <87offsnlbp.fsf@erlenstar.demon.co.uk>, on 05/07/2002
   at 02:23 PM, Andrew Gierth <andrew@erlenstar.demon.co.uk> said:

>Reviewing the list traffic at the time suggests that many of the
>people responding supported retaining the policy issues only in the
>interests of producing a completed draft, on the assumption that
>_any_ document was better than nothing.

And some strongly defended those policy issues. You list a number of
"questionable" uses of SHOULD and MUST; I recall some of us arguing in
favor of upgrading some of the Shoulds to MUSTs. We've hashed over
these issues enough times that nobody is likely to change his position
in the remaining time.

Speaking for myself, there have drafts that I didn't comment on
because I saw nothing that needed to be changed. I'm sure that there
were plenty of others who did not bother to post a concurring message
unless someone called for a straw vote.
 

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
     Atid/2
     Team OS/2
     Team PL/I
-----------------------------------------------------------


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.