Jim Jagielski wrote:
[X] +1. Yes, the above works and addresses my concerns
as well as the problems which started this whole
thing.
[ ] 0. Whatever.
[ ] -1. The above does not work for the following reasons:
My proposal was to put the principles forward clearly:
- core changes need to be discussed beforehand
- calls for review (or vetoes, which in the end are sometimes very
similar) should be considered rather than exclusively spend time to
determine if they are legitimate
[Your proposal generally has more constraints and is identical to
Jean-Frédéric rejected proposal; great, thanks a lot :) My only (minor)
reservation is the lack of real criterion for determining which patch
should be discussed beforehand or put to review in the development
branch, which creates a room for interpretation, hence some "artistic"
feeling.]
Since you brought forward this reasonable compromise vote, I vote in
favor of it. I will trust you to monitor the Tomcat project in the
future [since you've apparently decided to increase your involvement in
the project] to see that this is properly respected.
Anyway, thanks a lot for your decision and involvement. I trust you to
see how to help resolve the little "differences" I have with Filip now :)
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
