On 10/16/06, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/16/06, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm -1 on it as it stands, as I have a few problems with the proposed POM:
Ok, you have just convinced me that it is better to make the next
release of commons-fileupload without waiting for the availability of
the commons-parent POM. :-(
I haven't got any objections against you arguments, but it's nasty
asking several times whether "we are ready" and now getting blocking
votes again.
<snip/>
No, its not.
I believe many of us try to follow developments when feedback is
requested, but its not feasible every time. We want as many
participants as are interested to look at things and get involved, and
do so whenever their schedule allows for it. Its likely that some may
not get a chance before the vote is called. I would tend to agree with
you, if numerous votes had been called on this topic already.
Procedurally, this vote thread has lost its clarity. Some have voted,
changes have been made to the release artifact thereafter, and others
have voted on the changed artifact. Suggest you close this vote and
start another vote with a slightly different subject (so we can easily
distinguish the two threads). Personally, within the initial email in
the vote thread, I'd be glad to see:
a) svn revision number at which the POM is to be released
b) closing date and time of vote
Thanks for your time spent on this.
-Rahul
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
