On 09/12/2018 10:58 AM, Graham Leggett wrote:
On 12 Sep 2018, at 03:15, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net
<mailto:wr...@rowe-clan.net>> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018, 17:42 Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm
<mailto:minf...@sharp.fm>> wrote:
On 11 Sep 2018, at 20:35, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com
<mailto:j...@jagunet.com>> wrote:
> This is what I propose:
>
> o Later on this week I svn cp trunk over to branches/2.5.x
-1 ... Veto on the basis of project bylaws. Propose a revision for voting.
I've totally lost you. Jim describes creating a branch, how is this
related to voting?
I am not Bill, but it is likely a reference to the fact that you can
veto code changes, not community/workflow changes. I see Jim's proposal
as the latter, so I'm not sure why the attempted veto. The codebase
itself isn't being changed from what I can gather, only the workflow is.
With regards,
Daniel.
Rather than a wall of text, can you propose corrections to the above?
This is an attempt to discard the work of all committers who were told
their code wouldn't be included until the next version major.minor.
Complete disenfranchisement via a pocket veto of all changes.
Again, totally lost you. I can’t see anything in Jim’s proposal that
suggests we throw away code or work from trunk, and I would not allow
that to happen either. Have you mixed up the messages you’ve replied to?
Regards,
Graham
—
