Verified Commit ea20e615 authored Jun 13, 2022 by anarcat

reject TPA-RFC-15 (team#40363)

The rationale here is that we prefer to outsource the technical and
staff risks to outside, because TPA is already pretty loaded.

The problem, now, of course, is that we need to make a NEW RFC, but
one thing at a time.

For details, see tpa-team email with Message-ID:
CAAA5PKyJBWX82MYmXPX-Uq8+U00tO8DDFDA0yoGjYAOOX8qTVw@mail.gmail.com

parent 54ea56d4

policy.md

+1 −2

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -23,7 +23,6 @@ and add it to the above list.

		<!-- No policy is currently `proposed`. -->

		* [TPA-RFC-15: Email services](policy/tpa-rfc-15-email-services)
		* [TPA-RFC-26: LimeSurvey upgrade](policy/tpa-rfc-26-limesurvey-upgrade)
		* [TPA-RFC-29: Lektor SCSS Plugin](policy/tpa-rfc-29-lektor-scss-plugin)
		* [TPA-RFC-30: Changing how lego plugins are used](policy/tpa-rfc-30-change-lego-plugins)
		@@ -46,7 +45,7 @@ and add it to the above list.

		## Rejected

		No policy has been `rejected` so far.
		* [TPA-RFC-15: Email services](policy/tpa-rfc-15-email-services)

		## Obsolete

policy/tpa-rfc-15-email-services.md

+1 −1

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -1021,7 +1021,7 @@ the former.

		# Status

		This proposal is currently in the `proposed` state.
		This proposal is currently in the `rejected` state.

		# References