Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Project by-laws
From: Robert Samuel Newson <rnewson@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <19793089.19047.1398719368016.JavaMail.Joan@RITA>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 22:13:06 +0100
Cc: andy@nms.de
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9E0FFAFF-6D59-40BC-9766-0BE94E00DD2F@apache.org>
References: <19793089.19047.1398719368016.JavaMail.Joan@RITA>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org


It does seem justified though, it=92s obviously to make it easy to refer =
unambiguously to a particular item, that doesn=92t mean to say we can=92t =
render it better than this. I would rather not have a document that =
states everything twice if we can avoid it.

B.

On 28 Apr 2014, at 22:09, Joan Touzet <joant@atypical.net> wrote:

> I have form issues with these bylaws, primarily that they are =
intimidating
> in their layout and structure. Legal-style #.#.#.# can be especially =
hard
> to read and encodes a viewpoint that is grounded in the American legal
> system. The HTML formatting in this specific example is also difficult=20=

> to read
>=20
> That said, perhaps it is appropriate that our bylaws be this way at =
least
> in part. Would anyone object to a plain-language summary up top in =
addition
> to the legal #.#.#.# commentary?
>=20
> -Joan