[csw-maintainers] amendments and issues with recent prop

[Jonathan Craig]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> wrote:
> That being said, I fail to see how the Secretary has "a duty" to
> protect a procedure that was never officially made a procedure of the
> organization in the first place.

Regardless of duties I feel it is important that the current proposal
stand on its own.  We need to make some progress and that requires a
clear and unambiguous vote.  Allowing a myriad  of choices would
simply split the vote.  If one cannot vote for the proposal as written
then choose to deny or abstain.  Further, the review process is not
critical to the success of failure of determining our goals of
implementing an automated release process.  This proposal neither
support or denies the possibility of creating a review process in the
future.

Phil, I would suggest you write up a proposal to cover the review
process as you see fit.  Please remember it will be voted upon by a
broad audience and therefore must meet that audiences needs and
desires.