Re: [cti] MVP Discussion

[John-Mark Gurney <jmg@newcontext.com>]

Patrick Maroney wrote this message on Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 16:01 +0000:
> (2) Some Items are not well described, are highly subjective in interpretation, or have an obvious bias in their descriptions. We should allow for iteration through this process. If one is not certain of the implications to their Use Cases and Requirements, they can Abstain in this round and make comments on these Items.

I would say that if it's not well described and the like, that you
should vote no (maybe w/ a comment).  If the item isn't well understood,
or important enough that someone put time in to make it ready, then it
clearly isn't important enough to be in the MVP.

-- 
John-Mark