Re: [HIG] latest HIG draft

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org>]

On 15Nov2001 09:41PM (-0800), Seth Nickell wrote:
> On Thu, 2001-11-15 at 21:08, Seth Nickell wrote:
> > > The HIG group agreed to use my intro, and I think it was rude of you
> > > to edit it into unrecognizability without discussing it with the
> > > group, or asking me.
> > 
> > It wasn't an edit, other than the list, so it shouldn't be recognizable.

Your first and third paragraphs say same things as my first two, just
using different words and in a somewhat different order. But OK, not
worth debating this.

> > > If for some reason you want to reject the group's decision to use my
> > > intro, then I would ask you write a new one from scratch instead of
> > > riding roughshod over mine.
> > 
> > I will remind you that your intro was originally written as an alternate
> > and was not, to my recollection comissioned.

Are you saying it was bad of me to write a new intro instead of
suggesting changes to your original? I think the important thing is
that I followed the process, posted it publicly, gave everyone
(including you) the chance to comment, and left it up to the group to
decide whether to use it.

> > The decision to use your intro was made by Adam, who also made the
> > decision to use the intro that is currently in CVS.

As I recall, multiple people suggested using my intro in their
reviews, so I would tend to say the former decision was made in
accordance with the review process rather than by Adam personally.

> I've changed CVS to use your intro, we can work from there and decide
> which parts to use, what to change etc.

Thank you, Seth, I really appreciate that. I'll be glad to make any
changes you think are needed.

More generally, I think we need to stick to a consistent process for
the HIG. It's easy to get frustrated when it seems like the ground
rules change all the time and without warning.


Regards,

Maciej