Here's another +1. On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 27/03/12 17:07, Paolo Castagna wrote: > >> Robert Vesse wrote: >> >>> I would release now as we have several more rounds of emails and votes >>> to get through before Jena actually gets to graduate, namely: >>> >>> - Proposed Resolution Discussion on [email protected] >>> - Resolution vote on [email protected] >>> - Board Meeting (which is third monday of month so if we time everything >>> nicely we may get graduation approved by end of April) >>> >> >> Hi Rob >> >> We currently have two +1 from committers, vote has closed. >> I think it is possible to run the [VOTE] for longer an wait to >> see if another vote comes (if it is necessary) before sending >> the [VOTE] on [email protected]. But, I am not sure about this. >> >> I assumed my [VOTE] was implicit, but I guess it is a wrong >> assumption, so I explicitly voted now (but after the deadline). >> Is such vote valid? >> > > Two +1's so far. > > Is this vote really closed? I don't see a CLOSED message. The deadline > is really just the earliest time when you can declare a RESULT and close it > with a positive outcome because you have then timed out on any -1's. > Voting after the named deadline is all too common. > > What do you want to do? Having said it's closed in this message, without > a message tagged as such, leaves it in an uncertain state. Time to > collapse that wave function. > > Andy > > >> Will the [VOTE] for LARQ be the last [VOTE] for a release of a >> module before sending the [VOTE] for graduation or we need/want >> to release SDB as well before that? >> >> Paolo >> >
