Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Ralph Goers wrote:
But from what I understand of the rules on vetoing he has met his
obligation and doesn't have to respond further if he doesn't choose to.
I agree, except that he has to provide information *when* he thinks
that we can switch to Java 5 (see Jason's mail). Otherwise we have to
discuss this over and over again.
From the consensus building perspective, that would be appropriate.
But please read my other email on vetoing. Perhaps in the future we can
build this into the process.
Ralph
