Ralph Goers wrote: > Now we are getting nit-picky. This page lists three categories; > procedural, code modification and package releases. Quite frankly, I > don't think this vote has much to do with any of these because: > a) procedural to me is a process - such as switching from ant to maven. > One could argue from a warped point of view that changing a dependency > fits in this category. > b) code modification - no code is actually being modified by changing a > dependency. (At least yet).
This "b" is the closest category, i reckon. > c) package releases - well, it is pretty obvious that this doesn't fit. > > So to be honest, I think this is something the PMC has to decide which > process to follow. Yes. We need guidelines so that we can handle each situation without needing to make up ad hoc policies. > Having said that, I'd probably lean toward the more restrictive view > just to be fair. > > Ralph > > Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > > > >Which is the case, quoting http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html: > > > >"Votes on Code Modification > > > >For code-modification votes, +1 votes are in favour of the proposal, > >but -1 votes are vetos and kill the proposal dead until all vetoers > >withdraw their -1 votes." I reckon that Joerg did the perfect thing. He felt strongly enough to vote -1, and then provided an alternative. It takes a lot of guts to vote -1 ... thanks. If we think he is wrong then challenge his veto. Otherwise go back to the drawing board and come up with an alternative proposal to vote on. -David
