Re: So what next?

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Keith Packard wrote:

> I suggest that we will not be able to reach rough concensus on this issue
> in any reasonable timeframe (like the next decade).  However, it is not an
> issue which can be left unresolved, so we need to find a way to make a
> decision.  I would be willing to accept the board's direction on this
> issue.  I suggest that we have it brought to a vote there and move on with
> whatever plan they specify.

There was a very clear agreement several months ago on the conference calls
that the modular tree was the plan for going forward, as long as it didn't
turn out to be a real fiasco. So far, I haven't seen anything that looks like
a real fiasco that would warrant this decisions being reversed.

There may be a couple of things that are yet unproven, so we should clearly
identify what these are, and push to prove them to everyones satisfaction.

Now that the modular tree is working pretty well, it might be time to take
a moment, and consider wether or not there is sufficient documentation to
explain how to use/build this tree. It's easy once you have done the 4 steps
needed to set it up, but there are places where it is easy to stumble while
taking those 4 steps.


                                Stuart

Stuart R. Anderson                               anderson-zEVBPjwFtHNWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
Network & Software Engineering                   http://www.netsweng.com/
1024D/37A79149:                                  0791 D3B8 9A4C 2CDC A31F
                                                 BD03 0A62 E534 37A7 9149