[eagle] Re: A wild thought

Robert McGwier rwmcgwier at gmail.com
Tue Jan 2 06:51:32 PST 2007


I completely believe in openness.  There has been some grumbling about 
the small peer review groups but this has more to do with unwieldy 
meetings on these low bandwidth VoIP tools we are using than it does 
with secrecy.  I support this completely.  I also suggest that we have 
an official scribe at each peer review to take down detailed notes of 
our peer review sessions to post on  EaglePedia.  Again,  the size is 
about efficiency, not closedness.  We would welcome comments from all.

Bob





Jim Sanford wrote:
> Team:
> I've been thinking about this for a while.  Recent publicity for Eagle 
> in multiple publications has resurrected the thought, so I seek your 
> comments.
>
> I'm considering seeking, for each discrete peer review, an additional 
> review team member from AMSAT membership at large.
>
>   


-- 
AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL,
TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair
"If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the
corridor in the other direction. " - Dietrich Bonhoffer



More information about the Eagle mailing list