3,4,2,1 non-binding On Mar 19, 2012, at 6:03 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
> My sincere apologies. I messed up on option (4) - it should read: > >> (4) If security is fixed in branch-0.22 within a short time-frame i.e. 2 >> months then we get option 1, else we get option 3. Effectively postpone >> discussion by 2 months, start a timer now. > > instead of > >> (4) If security is fixed in branch-0.22 within a short time-frame i.e. 2 >> months then we get option 1, else we get option 2. Effectively postpone >> discussion by 2 months, start a timer now. > > > Let me restart the vote. > > Arun > > On Mar 19, 2012, at 5:13 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > >> We've discussed several options: >> >> (1) Rename branch-0.22 to branch-2, rename branch-0.23 to branch-3. >> (2) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-3, keep branch-0.22 as-is i.e. leave a hole. >> (3) Rename branch-0.23 to branch-2, keep branch-0.22 as-is. >> (4) If security is fixed in branch-0.22 within a short time-frame i.e. 2 >> months then we get option 1, else we get option 2. Effectively postpone >> discussion by 2 months, start a timer now. >> (5) Do nothing, keep branch-0.22 and branch-0.23 as-is. >> >> Let's do a STV [1] to get reach consensus. >> >> Please vote by listing the options above in order of your preferences. >> >> thanks, >> Arun >> >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote >> > > -- > Arun C. Murthy > Hortonworks Inc. > http://hortonworks.com/ > >
