I'd like to call a vote on acceptance of the above methodology,
as crafted and fine-tuned by Costin and myself. It is worthwhile
to note that, really, these are the typical ASF methods, but
with some "grainy" aspects better defined. In essence, some
typical "niceties" are now mandated (changes, even in CTR, which
affect the API, must be brought up first to gauge community
approval).
[ ] +1. Yes, the above works and addresses my concerns
as well as the problems which started this whole
thing.
[ ] 0. Whatever.
[ ] -1. The above does not work for the following reasons:
The vote will run for 96 hours instead of the normal 72 because of
the weekend. Only binding votes will be counted, but non-binding
votes will be used to address wider concern/acceptance of
the proposal.
Looks like the 96 hours are up, and the tally is:
+1: jim, yoav, tim, remy, costin, filip, mark, mladen,
jean-frederic, rainer
Not Sure: Peter followed up: "I agree with Remy: We must find a
process
that really work normally quick and can handle
conflicts fair." Henri +1'ed Peter's post. So I am
not sure if Peter actually cast a vote or simply made
a comment and I'm not sure if Henri +1'ed the proposal
or Peter's comment or both.
-1: null set
As such, the vote passes!!
We can now give ourselves a pat on the back for resolving this
and start implementing the changes we approved...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
