yes the -1 vote would be a veto in view of slf4j -> no agreement -> we would vote about jul.
or as mario suggested - let's start voting about jul. @mario: yes - i'll wait until monday for sure. and we should vote a bit longer than usual - due to holidays (+ it's an important topic for all myfaces projects) regards, gerhard http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2009/6/6 Ganesh <gan...@j4fry.org> > Hi, > > > we could also vote first about slf4j and everybody who prefers jul should > vote -1 > > if we don't have a majority for slf4j, we have to vote about jul. > > is that ok for everybody? > > From http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html my understanding of a -1 > vote is different from this. > > << Vetos > > A code-modification proposal may be stopped dead in its tracks by a -1 vote > by a qualified voter. This constitutes a veto, and it cannot be overruled > nor overridden by anyone. Vetos stand until and unless withdrawn by their > casters. > > To prevent vetos from being used capriciously, they must be accompanied by > a technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a security > exposure, negatively affects performance, etc.). A veto without a > justification is invalid and has no weight. >> > > Better use the fraction system for voting on the logging system: > > * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okey with this.' > * -0: 'I won't get in the way, but I'd rather we didn't do this.' > * -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational > justification for my feelings.' > * ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's do it!' > * -0.9: 'I really don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the way > if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.' > * +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the > skills necessary to help out.' > > Best regards, > Ganesh > > >
