cvs commit: src Makefile.inc1 src/share/mk bsd.subdir.mk

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <20040908153512.GA14213 at misty.eyesbeyond.com>
            Greg Lewis <glewis at eyesbeyond.com> writes:
: On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 12:00:06PM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
: > On Tuesday,  7 September 2004 at 15:19:40 +0000, Warner Losh wrote:
: > > imp         2004-09-07 15:19:40 UTC
: > >
: > >   FreeBSD src repository
: > >
: > >   Modified files:
: > >     .                    Makefile.inc1
: > >     share/mk             bsd.subdir.mk
: > >   Log:
: > >   Although 'Unanimous Consent' appears to be a well defined and used in
: > >   the US Senate, Canadian Parliament and Australian Senate, it was
: > >   causing some confusion.
: > 
: > Indeed, including the notion that it's used in the Australian Senate.
: > You'll recall the discussions that the South Australian Senate
: > understands the term, but they don't use it.  To quote the December
: > 2003 core report:
: > 
: > - grog reports a discussion with a member of the SA Senate.  The term
: >   "unanimous consent" is not used in Australian politics, and it could
: >   be interpreted both ways.  Any interpretation would be subject to
: >   quorum requirements.
: 
: <pedant>
: Either you had a discussion with a South Australian Senator (i.e., a member
: of the Australian Senate elected to represent the state of South Australia)
: or you had a discussion with a Member of the Legislative Council.  You can't
: have had a discussion with a member of the South Australian Senate since the
: upper house of the South Australian state parliament isn't called the Senate,
: its called the Legislative Council.
: </pedant>

See http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/pubs/Html/chap8016.htm and search for
"unanimous" for the reason I made the original statement.

I'm just glad core doesn't waste its times arguing over
well-defined[*] terms anymore.

Now, can we please get out of the way back machine and stop giving me
grief for a simple mistake, OK?

Warner

[*] Even Robert's rules of order
http://www.constitution.org/rror/rror--00.htm uses the term:
	When there is evidently no opposition, the formality of voting
	can be avoided by the chair's asking if there is any objection
	to the proposed action, and if there is none, announcing the
	result. The action thus taken is said to be done by general
	consent, or unanimous or silent consent.