Oct. 5, 2015
10:50 p.m.
Nathaniel Smith <njs@pobox.com> wrote:
Thanks Chuck! It looks like it's just wording tweaks / clarifications at this point, so nothing we need to discuss in detail on the list. If anyone wants to watch the sausage being made, then the link is above :-), and we'll continue the discussion in the PR unless anything substantive comes up.
Anyone has a veto? That reminds me of something that happened in the senate of Rome; they only had a small number of vetoers, sometimes only one or two, and even that caused havoc. I think it should be better clarified how much contribution is needed before someone can be considered to have veto rights. It would e.g. be ridiculous if I were to begin and veto stuff, as my contributions are minute... OMG. Sturla