Re: Vote change...

[Roy Fielding <fi...@beach.w3.org>]

I agree with rst on this one.

    -1 on all patch11.no-bsd-conf variations, period.

The patch, as supplied for vote, does not work.  Later patches
are irrelevant to this process.  And, while we're on the subject ...

    -1 for changing the rules on voting in mid-vote, just
       because your bug seems more important than others,
       with the singular exception for patches that fix
       known security holes.

Finally, with regard to public or not public, I do not feel
that is something we should be voting on at all.  ALL OF THE
BETA RELEASES SAY THEY ARE BETA RELEASES.  User's want these
patches now, regardless of frequent rebuilds, and that is exactly
what we promised them by offering the beta release.  Backing out
now is just silly, particularly when most of the current patches
can't be adequately tested until they *are* released to the public.
Quite frankly, the Apache group just isn't good enough at testing
to justify internal releases.

I am also getting fed up with the constant whining and revisionist
history about what is the voting process.  If you don't like it,
propose a different process FOR THE NEXT RELEASE and we can
have a weekend vote on the new process.  Until then, stick a cork
in it and start working on next week's patches.

*sheesh*

BTW, If you want to know why I am so pissed off at this, its because
I just spent two days trying to convince W3C to use the Apache server
and give hyperreal a W3C membership in exchange for running a W3C
special interest group on servers (i.e., an invited mailing list
of W3C members and selected individuals who are currently working
on servers).  I do not need to worry about the coherence of the
Apache Group at the same time!


 ....Roy T. Fielding  Department of ICS, University of California, Irvine USA
                      Visiting Scholar, MIT/LCS + World-Wide Web Consortium
                      (fielding@w3.org)                (fielding@ics.uci.edu)