[Kolab-devel] Closing Call: KEP #9

Georg C. F. Greve greve at kolabsys.com
Fri Sep 2 14:29:49 CEST 2011

On Friday 02 September 2011 13.23:53 Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> We are currently shipping a file in which, apparently, some entries have
> little to no rationale, its purpose may be unknown, with namespaces added
> that do not have an owner, lacking the necessary documentation, and some of
> which the probable owners fail to see the continued use.

Yes, that is a very valid point of concern.

> Seriously though, if not the KEP process, can we require somebody takes
> ownership of every annotation shipped, and document it's purpose to say the
> very least?

Why not require taking ownership of such an annotation by means of a KEP that 
actually documents what this is, does, and how it is used?

Best regards,

Georg C. F. Greve
Chief Executive Officer

Kolab Systems AG
Zürich, Switzerland

e: greve at kolabsys.com
t: +41 78 904 43 33
w: http://kolabsys.com

pgp: 86574ACA Georg C. F. Greve
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 308 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.kolab.org/pipermail/format/attachments/20110902/9d725fbf/attachment.sig>

More information about the format mailing list