[#1816] Ruby 1.5.3 under Tru64 (Alpha)? — Clemens Hintze <clemens.hintze@...>

Hi all,

17 messages 2000/03/14

[#1989] English Ruby/Gtk Tutorial? — schneik@...

18 messages 2000/03/17

[#2241] setter() for local variables — ts <decoux@...>

18 messages 2000/03/29

[ruby-talk:01750] Re: comp.lang.ruby RFD: withdraw or proceed?

From: Nigel Rantor <wiggly@...>
Date: 2000-03-06 09:30:33 UTC
List: ruby-talk #1750
Conrad Schneiker wrote:
> 
> ((comp.lang.misc + cc: ruby-lang ML))
> 
> At the end of this week we will need to decide whether I should withdraw the
> RFD or whether I should send off the paperwork would then lead from the RFD
> to the CFV (call for votes), sometime later this month.
> 
> We need around 120 yes votes from prospective users of comp.lang.ruby to
> succeed, and just to be on the safe side, we should probably aim for 200.
> 
> If we don't get enough yes votes, we have to wait another 6 months to
> resubmit the RFD. However if we withdraw the RFD instead, we could resubmit
> it some 3 months from now if we wanted to. In either of these cases,
> subsequent usage of comp.lang.misc would be a major factor in subsequent
> news.groups discussions.
> 
> Recommendations?
> 

Do a pre-emptive CFV on the mailing list/through c.l.misc and see what
response you get in the next three days. ruby-poll@wiggly.org is still
available if you want it. (well, its not like I have to do anything to
make it work...)

If there isn't going to be enough votes though I would say withdraw, not
least because the news.groups people will probably respect it more than
charging on and falling on our collective arses, like many of them
expect.

Regards,

   Nige

-- 
Nigel Rantor
e-mail - wormboyslim@wiggly.org

mandelbug /man'del-buhg/ n. 

[from the Mandelbrot set] A bug whose underlying causes are so complex
and obscure as to make its behavior appear chaotic or even
non-deterministic. This term implies that the speaker thinks it is a
Bohr bug, rather than a heisenbug. See also schroedinbug.

In This Thread

Prev Next