From: "Christian Geisert" <christian.geis...@isu-gmbh.de>
Jacques Le Roux schrieb:
Anyway a sole -1 is enough for reverting code without explanations
Wrong, a veto on code modification without an explanation is invalid!
See http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
Yes indeed, thanks for the correction Christian.
Not sure why I added "without explanations" it does not make sense since for a revert to be voted it has obviously to be discussed
before to establish the vote.
Actually I don't think we ever voted for a revert. Because it's really much bureaucratic, as as soon as we know that a commiter is
strongly against he will surely vote -1 (no she possible in our case)
But this shouldn't really be used all the time, it makes a lot more sense to
discuss things in advance (as Hans did)
Yes, we should all try to do so. Most of the time it's done.
Jacques
Christian
