On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <thiag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:14:56 -0300, Kalle Korhonen > <kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Richard's binding vote btw seems to mean that the whole vote will >> fail (Ulrich cannot change the interpretation of a binding vote with >> "their negative vote means that they will be excluded from the >> removal"). > That's how Apache works: one -1 binding vote, the vote result is no.
Not necessarily - that's why I said "seems to". If the voting style is not specified as was the case here, the default is majority with lazy consensus. A veto vote is the default only on code modification issues. There's still four binding for-votes but on an issue like this I really wouldn't go against any binding vote. >> It seems that the right path forward is to vote for each >> removal separately, of course the votes could run in parallel. > Or just vote to remove everyone in the original list except Richard, as he > was the only one to say something. Yes, that might work as well. Kalle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tapestry.apache.org
