You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> on 2015/11/04 03:37:48 UTC
[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Here is a tally of the VOTE
Commons PMC:
+1 from Dave Brosius, Luc Maisonobe, Phil Steitz, Joerg Schaibl,
Oliver Heger, Gary Gregory, Niall Pemberton
+0 from BenediKt Ritter
-0 from
-1 from Emmanuel Bourg, Mark Thomas, James Carman
Others:
-1 from Uwe Barthel
This VOTE, therefore, passes.
I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the -1
votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider. I
would also like to allow any others who have not registered an
opinion to chime in so we make the right decision.
Thanks,
Phil
On 10/29/15 5:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available for
> review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote, votes
> from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will
> execute a software grant with the authors and use the code as the
> basis for a new Commons Sandbox component.
>
> This VOTE will close in 72 hours. More discussion on the code and
> its fit in Commons is always welcome, but please do not reply to
> this thread with discussion, other than embedded justification for
> negative VOTES. Use the thread from [1] instead.
>
> Git commands to grab the code:
>
> git clone git@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git
> git checkout gh-pages
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/imoi5aipf63f7rsa
>
> [ ] +1 Yes!
> [ ] +0 OK...
> [ ] -0 OK, but...
> [ ] -1 We should not do this, because...
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Thomas Neidhart <th...@gmail.com>.
On 11/04/2015 03:37 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Here is a tally of the VOTE
>
> Commons PMC:
> +1 from Dave Brosius, Luc Maisonobe, Phil Steitz, Joerg Schaibl,
> Oliver Heger, Gary Gregory, Niall Pemberton
> +0 from BenediKt Ritter
> -0 from
> -1 from Emmanuel Bourg, Mark Thomas, James Carman
>
> Others:
> -1 from Uwe Barthel
>
> This VOTE, therefore, passes.
>
> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the -1
> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider. I
> would also like to allow any others who have not registered an
> opinion to chime in so we make the right decision.
I would not have a problem committing the code as is to the sandbox and
let people work on it.
In the end, I do not see much difference between any committer starting
to work on a new component in the sandbox and this case where already 2
committers expressed their interest in cleaning up / maintaining the
codebase and Dave already doing some work in this direction.
I am more concerned about the *existing* proper components that are
basically dead (and have been for a long time), while people are
regularly asking for progress or new releases.
Thomas
> Thanks,
>
> Phil
>
> On 10/29/15 5:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available for
>> review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote, votes
>> from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will
>> execute a software grant with the authors and use the code as the
>> basis for a new Commons Sandbox component.
>>
>> This VOTE will close in 72 hours. More discussion on the code and
>> its fit in Commons is always welcome, but please do not reply to
>> this thread with discussion, other than embedded justification for
>> negative VOTES. Use the thread from [1] instead.
>>
>> Git commands to grab the code:
>>
>> git clone git@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git
>> git checkout gh-pages
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/imoi5aipf63f7rsa
>>
>> [ ] +1 Yes!
>> [ ] +0 OK...
>> [ ] -0 OK, but...
>> [ ] -1 We should not do this, because...
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
With three -1 votes from PMC members, I am not comfortable
proceeding with this. I do not have the cycles right now to rejoin
the Incubator PMC and follow those lists, so this is going to have
to wait for a bit (likely until the holidays) unless someone else is
willing to take on the Incubator tasks. Thanks to all who voted and
thanks, Norm and Jeff for your patience with our processes.
Phil
On 11/3/15 7:37 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Here is a tally of the VOTE
>
> Commons PMC:
> +1 from Dave Brosius, Luc Maisonobe, Phil Steitz, Joerg Schaibl,
> Oliver Heger, Gary Gregory, Niall Pemberton
> +0 from BenediKt Ritter
> -0 from
> -1 from Emmanuel Bourg, Mark Thomas, James Carman
>
> Others:
> -1 from Uwe Barthel
>
> This VOTE, therefore, passes.
>
> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the -1
> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider. I
> would also like to allow any others who have not registered an
> opinion to chime in so we make the right decision.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Phil
>
> On 10/29/15 5:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available for
>> review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote, votes
>> from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will
>> execute a software grant with the authors and use the code as the
>> basis for a new Commons Sandbox component.
>>
>> This VOTE will close in 72 hours. More discussion on the code and
>> its fit in Commons is always welcome, but please do not reply to
>> this thread with discussion, other than embedded justification for
>> negative VOTES. Use the thread from [1] instead.
>>
>> Git commands to grab the code:
>>
>> git clone git@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git
>> git checkout gh-pages
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/imoi5aipf63f7rsa
>>
>> [ ] +1 Yes!
>> [ ] +0 OK...
>> [ ] -0 OK, but...
>> [ ] -1 We should not do this, because...
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/22/15 8:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > The person who called the VOTE should tally it up and report here.
>
> I did tally the VOTE. We had three -1 PMC Votes. I asked the -1s
> to reconsider and they did not change their votes. Technically, we
> could call it a pass and push forward, but I was not personally
> prepared to do that. I concluded that we did not have consensus to
> move forward directly into the Sandbox. I also stated that I do not
> have the cycles at this time to rejoin the Incubator PMC and
> initiate the process there. If someone else wants to do that,
> fine. Bottom line is the direct-to-sandbox approach failed to
> achieve consensus and we need someone to volunteer to take on the
> Incubator process for this if we want to get this code into Commons.
>
Thanks for the refresher.
Gary
>
> Phil
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Dave Brosius <db...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> I take it from our collective lack of movement, that we are voting no,
> and
> >> just not willing to say it. If that is the case, we should have the
> >> courtesy to say no, and at least give closure.
> >>
> >> dave
> >>
> >> On 11/08/2015 02:14 PM, Dave Brosius wrote:
> >>
> >>> I have already merged the changes into master, and deleted the gh-pages
> >>> branch here
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/mebigfatguy/Naomi
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I can add a pull request to Norm to accept these in his repository, if
> >>> you like.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 11/08/2015 01:53 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Phil:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the
> >>>>>
> >>>> -1
> >>>>
> >>>>> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
> >>>>> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
> >>>>> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I have an counter proposal: how about addressing most of the concerns
> >>>> first:
> >>>>
> >>>> - merge the mavenisation cleanly, it is not asked too much to display
> >>>> it in master not gh-pages
> >>>> - add some samples to the readme
> >>>> - adopt commons codestyle
> >>>>
> >>>> If those 3 things are done by the submitters I personally would be
> very
> >>>> reliefed (I still would not see a case to use it myself, but at least
> >>>> we wont have any ground for the rockstar argument anymore). I am not
> >>>> sure about the "incubator" argument, as I understood it, it is not
> >>>> needed for IP clearance.
> >>>>
> >>>> And given the vote already passed you can just make the above clean-up
> >>>> in git(hub) and get it merged to the sandbox.
> >>>>
> >>>> gruss
> >>>> Bernd
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 11/22/15 8:47 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> The person who called the VOTE should tally it up and report here.
I did tally the VOTE. We had three -1 PMC Votes. I asked the -1s
to reconsider and they did not change their votes. Technically, we
could call it a pass and push forward, but I was not personally
prepared to do that. I concluded that we did not have consensus to
move forward directly into the Sandbox. I also stated that I do not
have the cycles at this time to rejoin the Incubator PMC and
initiate the process there. If someone else wants to do that,
fine. Bottom line is the direct-to-sandbox approach failed to
achieve consensus and we need someone to volunteer to take on the
Incubator process for this if we want to get this code into Commons.
Phil
>
> Gary
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Dave Brosius <db...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I take it from our collective lack of movement, that we are voting no, and
>> just not willing to say it. If that is the case, we should have the
>> courtesy to say no, and at least give closure.
>>
>> dave
>>
>> On 11/08/2015 02:14 PM, Dave Brosius wrote:
>>
>>> I have already merged the changes into master, and deleted the gh-pages
>>> branch here
>>>
>>> https://github.com/mebigfatguy/Naomi
>>>
>>>
>>> I can add a pull request to Norm to accept these in his repository, if
>>> you like.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/08/2015 01:53 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>>>
>>>> Phil:
>>>>
>>>>> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the
>>>>>
>>>> -1
>>>>
>>>>> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
>>>>> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
>>>>> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider.
>>>>>
>>>> I have an counter proposal: how about addressing most of the concerns
>>>> first:
>>>>
>>>> - merge the mavenisation cleanly, it is not asked too much to display
>>>> it in master not gh-pages
>>>> - add some samples to the readme
>>>> - adopt commons codestyle
>>>>
>>>> If those 3 things are done by the submitters I personally would be very
>>>> reliefed (I still would not see a case to use it myself, but at least
>>>> we wont have any ground for the rockstar argument anymore). I am not
>>>> sure about the "incubator" argument, as I understood it, it is not
>>>> needed for IP clearance.
>>>>
>>>> And given the vote already passed you can just make the above clean-up
>>>> in git(hub) and get it merged to the sandbox.
>>>>
>>>> gruss
>>>> Bernd
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
The person who called the VOTE should tally it up and report here.
Gary
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Dave Brosius <db...@apache.org> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I take it from our collective lack of movement, that we are voting no, and
> just not willing to say it. If that is the case, we should have the
> courtesy to say no, and at least give closure.
>
> dave
>
> On 11/08/2015 02:14 PM, Dave Brosius wrote:
>
>> I have already merged the changes into master, and deleted the gh-pages
>> branch here
>>
>> https://github.com/mebigfatguy/Naomi
>>
>>
>> I can add a pull request to Norm to accept these in his repository, if
>> you like.
>>
>>
>> On 11/08/2015 01:53 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>>
>>> Phil:
>>>
>>>> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the
>>>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>>> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
>>>> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
>>>> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider.
>>>>
>>> I have an counter proposal: how about addressing most of the concerns
>>> first:
>>>
>>> - merge the mavenisation cleanly, it is not asked too much to display
>>> it in master not gh-pages
>>> - add some samples to the readme
>>> - adopt commons codestyle
>>>
>>> If those 3 things are done by the submitters I personally would be very
>>> reliefed (I still would not see a case to use it myself, but at least
>>> we wont have any ground for the rockstar argument anymore). I am not
>>> sure about the "incubator" argument, as I understood it, it is not
>>> needed for IP clearance.
>>>
>>> And given the vote already passed you can just make the above clean-up
>>> in git(hub) and get it merged to the sandbox.
>>>
>>> gruss
>>> Bernd
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Dave Brosius <db...@apache.org>.
Folks,
I take it from our collective lack of movement, that we are voting no,
and just not willing to say it. If that is the case, we should have the
courtesy to say no, and at least give closure.
dave
On 11/08/2015 02:14 PM, Dave Brosius wrote:
> I have already merged the changes into master, and deleted the
> gh-pages branch here
>
> https://github.com/mebigfatguy/Naomi
>
>
> I can add a pull request to Norm to accept these in his repository, if
> you like.
>
>
> On 11/08/2015 01:53 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>> Phil:
>>> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the
>> -1
>>> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
>>> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
>>> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider.
>> I have an counter proposal: how about addressing most of the concerns
>> first:
>>
>> - merge the mavenisation cleanly, it is not asked too much to display
>> it in master not gh-pages
>> - add some samples to the readme
>> - adopt commons codestyle
>>
>> If those 3 things are done by the submitters I personally would be very
>> reliefed (I still would not see a case to use it myself, but at least
>> we wont have any ground for the rockstar argument anymore). I am not
>> sure about the "incubator" argument, as I understood it, it is not
>> needed for IP clearance.
>>
>> And given the vote already passed you can just make the above clean-up
>> in git(hub) and get it merged to the sandbox.
>>
>> gruss
>> Bernd
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Dave Brosius <db...@apache.org>.
I have already merged the changes into master, and deleted the gh-pages
branch here
https://github.com/mebigfatguy/Naomi
I can add a pull request to Norm to accept these in his repository, if
you like.
On 11/08/2015 01:53 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> Phil:
>> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the
> -1
>> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
>> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
>> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider.
> I have an counter proposal: how about addressing most of the concerns
> first:
>
> - merge the mavenisation cleanly, it is not asked too much to display
> it in master not gh-pages
> - add some samples to the readme
> - adopt commons codestyle
>
> If those 3 things are done by the submitters I personally would be very
> reliefed (I still would not see a case to use it myself, but at least
> we wont have any ground for the rockstar argument anymore). I am not
> sure about the "incubator" argument, as I understood it, it is not
> needed for IP clearance.
>
> And given the vote already passed you can just make the above clean-up
> in git(hub) and get it merged to the sandbox.
>
> gruss
> Bernd
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Bernd Eckenfels <ec...@zusammenkunft.net>.
Phil:
> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the
-1
> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider.
I have an counter proposal: how about addressing most of the concerns
first:
- merge the mavenisation cleanly, it is not asked too much to display
it in master not gh-pages
- add some samples to the readme
- adopt commons codestyle
If those 3 things are done by the submitters I personally would be very
reliefed (I still would not see a case to use it myself, but at least
we wont have any ground for the rockstar argument anymore). I am not
sure about the "incubator" argument, as I understood it, it is not
needed for IP clearance.
And given the vote already passed you can just make the above clean-up
in git(hub) and get it merged to the sandbox.
gruss
Bernd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On 11/4/15 5:50 AM, Gilles wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 19:37:48 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> Here is a tally of the VOTE
>>
>> Commons PMC:
>> +1 from Dave Brosius, Luc Maisonobe, Phil Steitz, Joerg Schaibl,
>> Oliver Heger, Gary Gregory, Niall Pemberton
>> +0 from BenediKt Ritter
>> -0 from
>> -1 from Emmanuel Bourg, Mark Thomas, James Carman
>>
>> Others:
>> -1 from Uwe Barthel
>>
>> This VOTE, therefore, passes.
>>
>> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the -1
>> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
>> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
>> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider. I
>> would also like to allow any others who have not registered an
>> opinion to chime in so we make the right decision.
>
> Would it make it any easier if the transfer were to an existing
> component? ["Commons-Lang" seems quite appropriate.]
That's a good idea; but I don't personally think it is appropriate.
We have tried to keep the scope of [lang] contained to simple
extensions of the jdk. Way back in ancient history, the same
approach was considered for [math], but it ended up starting in the
sandbox as a separate component instead. It doesn't really matter
that much, though, as in either case we should start in the sandbox
with a new sandbox component.
Phil
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> On 10/29/15 5:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>>> This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available
>>> for
>>> review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote,
>>> votes
>>> from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will
>>> execute a software grant with the authors and use the code as the
>>> basis for a new Commons Sandbox component.
>>>
>>> This VOTE will close in 72 hours. More discussion on the code and
>>> its fit in Commons is always welcome, but please do not reply to
>>> this thread with discussion, other than embedded justification for
>>> negative VOTES. Use the thread from [1] instead.
>>>
>>> Git commands to grab the code:
>>>
>>> git clone git@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git
>>> git checkout gh-pages
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Phil
>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/imoi5aipf63f7rsa
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Yes!
>>> [ ] +0 OK...
>>> [ ] -0 OK, but...
>>> [ ] -1 We should not do this, because...
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Gilles <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org>.
On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 19:37:48 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Here is a tally of the VOTE
>
> Commons PMC:
> +1 from Dave Brosius, Luc Maisonobe, Phil Steitz, Joerg Schaibl,
> Oliver Heger, Gary Gregory, Niall Pemberton
> +0 from BenediKt Ritter
> -0 from
> -1 from Emmanuel Bourg, Mark Thomas, James Carman
>
> Others:
> -1 from Uwe Barthel
>
> This VOTE, therefore, passes.
>
> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the -1
> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider. I
> would also like to allow any others who have not registered an
> opinion to chime in so we make the right decision.
Would it make it any easier if the transfer were to an existing
component? ["Commons-Lang" seems quite appropriate.]
Regards,
Gilles
> Thanks,
>
> Phil
>
> On 10/29/15 5:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available for
>> review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote, votes
>> from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will
>> execute a software grant with the authors and use the code as the
>> basis for a new Commons Sandbox component.
>>
>> This VOTE will close in 72 hours. More discussion on the code and
>> its fit in Commons is always welcome, but please do not reply to
>> this thread with discussion, other than embedded justification for
>> negative VOTES. Use the thread from [1] instead.
>>
>> Git commands to grab the code:
>>
>> git clone git@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git
>> git checkout gh-pages
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/imoi5aipf63f7rsa
>>
>> [ ] +1 Yes!
>> [ ] +0 OK...
>> [ ] -0 OK, but...
>> [ ] -1 We should not do this, because...
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 04/11/2015 02:37, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Here is a tally of the VOTE
>
> Commons PMC:
> +1 from Dave Brosius, Luc Maisonobe, Phil Steitz, Joerg Schaibl,
> Oliver Heger, Gary Gregory, Niall Pemberton
> +0 from BenediKt Ritter
> -0 from
> -1 from Emmanuel Bourg, Mark Thomas, James Carman
>
> Others:
> -1 from Uwe Barthel
>
> This VOTE, therefore, passes.
>
> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the -1
> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider. I
> would also like to allow any others who have not registered an
> opinion to chime in so we make the right decision.
Whilst I respect the decision of the majority, I haven't seen anything
(yet) on the dev list that makes me want to change my vote.
Mark
>
> Thanks,
>
> Phil
>
> On 10/29/15 5:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available for
>> review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote, votes
>> from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will
>> execute a software grant with the authors and use the code as the
>> basis for a new Commons Sandbox component.
>>
>> This VOTE will close in 72 hours. More discussion on the code and
>> its fit in Commons is always welcome, but please do not reply to
>> this thread with discussion, other than embedded justification for
>> negative VOTES. Use the thread from [1] instead.
>>
>> Git commands to grab the code:
>>
>> git clone git@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git
>> git checkout gh-pages
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/imoi5aipf63f7rsa
>>
>> [ ] +1 Yes!
>> [ ] +0 OK...
>> [ ] -0 OK, but...
>> [ ] -1 We should not do this, because...
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Naomi
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, slight correction. Uwe voted -0 and there were no -0 votes
from PMC members.
On 11/3/15 7:37 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> Here is a tally of the VOTE
>
> Commons PMC:
> +1 from Dave Brosius, Luc Maisonobe, Phil Steitz, Joerg Schaibl,
> Oliver Heger, Gary Gregory, Niall Pemberton
> +0 from BenediKt Ritter
> -0 from
> -1 from Emmanuel Bourg, Mark Thomas, James Carman
>
> Others:
> -1 from Uwe Barthel
>
> This VOTE, therefore, passes.
>
> I am not happy about proceeding, though, in the presence of the -1
> votes. We like to make decisions by consensus and while this is a
> procedural decision and therefore subject to majority approval, I
> would like to ask those who case negative votes to reconsider. I
> would also like to allow any others who have not registered an
> opinion to chime in so we make the right decision.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Phil
>
> On 10/29/15 5:42 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> This is a VOTE to accept the code discussed in [1] and available for
>> review using the git commands below. All are welcome to vote, votes
>> from PMC members are binding. Assuming a positive vote, we will
>> execute a software grant with the authors and use the code as the
>> basis for a new Commons Sandbox component.
>>
>> This VOTE will close in 72 hours. More discussion on the code and
>> its fit in Commons is always welcome, but please do not reply to
>> this thread with discussion, other than embedded justification for
>> negative VOTES. Use the thread from [1] instead.
>>
>> Git commands to grab the code:
>>
>> git clone git@github.com:NormanShapiro/Naomi.git
>> git checkout gh-pages
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Phil
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/imoi5aipf63f7rsa
>>
>> [ ] +1 Yes!
>> [ ] +0 OK...
>> [ ] -0 OK, but...
>> [ ] -1 We should not do this, because...
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org