Vincent Massol wrote:
>
> If we count the votes :
> +1 craig
> +0 vincent
> -0 ignacio
> ? geir
>
> The first think we need to do is to amend our charter with the new voting
> rules. I seem to remember that there was a beginning of proposition from
> Rodney. Only Geir did answer. I just sent my answer. So first, let's decide
> the voting rule and then it will be much easier to apply them for items such
> as the one Craig is proposing.
>
> If need be I'll change my vote to +1 on the build.properties subject if it
> can make things go forward.
If this is about ".ant.properties" vs "build.properties", I really don't
care. +1 from me if it helps move this forward.
I think the that my argument is valid re an expressive name like
'build.properties' but I don't feel strongly.
I am sure your remarks on the Windows GUI problem are important to some.
However, I think it's important to not make this 'binding law' for the
components, but a strongly supported commons convention. If you want to
flout convention, flout....
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
