I don't think there is anything wrong with checking with others around a fairly
major change like this, which by the way I am +1 on, but switching the travis
config and changing a 7 to an 8 in the pom.xml is technically a code change,
and only really needs the votes accordingly for that. If you want that vote to
happen here and not on the JIRA for visibility that technically is not
according to the bylaws but it follows the spirit so I personally am OK with
it. http://storm.apache.org/contribute/BYLAWS.html
Which on a side note, that whole discussion about changing which mailing lists
get updated when, we might want to either change the bylaws or update some
documentation so that votes specifically are forwarded to the dev list.
Otherwise we start to run into a situation where an important vote for a code
change is happening like this, and some people are not aware of it, because
they are only watching the dev list. - Bobby
On Tuesday, August 16, 2016 11:59 PM, Harsha Chintalapani <[email protected]>
wrote:
I guess everyone has different interpretation of what Bylaws means . More
context
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1628
anything wrong with Vote thread?
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:04 PM P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> wrote:
> Why is this a VOTE?
>
>
> > On Aug 16, 2016, at 9:18 PM, Harsha Chintalapani <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> > We had a discussion thread for removing Java 7 support for Storm
> > 2.0.
> > Here is a formal voting thread and the JIRA
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2041.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Harsha
>
>
