On the call the votes were very clear to accept the PR (not reject it).
So I'm again rejecting the request to reject the PR -  it would be better
to express such votes in positive terms.

-1

Tim.



On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 9:06 AM Dr Paul Dale <[email protected]> wrote:

> -0
>
> Pauli
>
> On 20/4/21 8:23 pm, Nicola Tuveri wrote:
> > Following up on
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02407.html
> > <https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02407.html>
>
> > we had a discussion on this during last week OTC meeting, and opened a
> > vote limited exclusively to the matter of rejecting PR#14759.
> >
> > We lost the record of the votes collected during the call, so opening
> > it officially today with a clean slate.
> >
> >
> > ----------------
> > topic: Reject PR#14759
> > Proposed by Nicola Tuveri
> > Public: yes
> > opened: 2021-04-20
> > closed: 2021-mm-dd
> > accepted:  yes/no  (for: X, against: Y, abstained: Z, not voted: T)
> >   Matt       [  ]
> >   Mark       [  ]
> >   Pauli      [  ]
> >   Viktor     [  ]
> >   Tim        [  ]
> >   Richard    [  ]
> >   Shane      [  ]
> >   Tomas      [  ]
> >   Kurt       [  ]
> >   Matthias   [  ]
> >   Nicola     [+1]
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to