From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LXfEM-0000ke-DB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:20:06 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C7B87E04E7; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F281E04E7 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (xray.science.oregonstate.edu [128.193.220.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 495DE6767C; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:20:04 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: Tiziano =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?= Cc: gentoo-council Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Preliminary Meeting-Topics for 12 February 2009 Message-ID: <20090212172003.GB3652@comet> References: <1234257125.18160.2016.camel@localhost> <20090210212518.GD3692@comet> <1234421593.20307.22.camel@localhost> <20090212155056.GA3642@comet> <20090212155506.3bf4c8f2@snowcone> <20090212160114.GC3642@comet> <1234457268.20950.7.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dc+cDN39EJAMEtIO" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1234457268.20950.7.camel@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Archives-Salt: 9b4f6163-a87d-4a47-907e-7da4ab9b5283 X-Archives-Hash: f11e7738cb49c3e489ad14f7712ecf32 --dc+cDN39EJAMEtIO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 17:47 Thu 12 Feb , Tiziano M=FCller wrote: > From my past experience I can say that having someone responsible for=20 > a task within the leading group is a good way to have the whole team=20 > informed about what's going on. I agree with having someone responsible. I don't see what "within the=20 leading group" adds, and the continued assertion that this is required=20 could use some support. --=20 Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com --dc+cDN39EJAMEtIO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkmUWkMACgkQXVaO67S1rtvnTACgnHVfDnpRqGUWiml692O77lAj TxYAoJkP2y0eO2NPl0by9UlUSZzLLn4B =PJf3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --dc+cDN39EJAMEtIO--