Assuming there are no major changes to the PUP, I’ll vote +1. Thanks for putting this together.
David On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 7:21 AM Ina Panova <ipan...@redhat.com> wrote: > PR updated, > ready for re-review. > > > > -------- > Regards, > > Ina Panova > Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. > > "Do not go where the path may lead, > go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Ina Panova <ipan...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> I have opened a PR for PUP-6 [0] which describes the commit bit >> assignment/revocation process. >> >> Please take a look to review and provide feedback. >> >> I'd like to call for a vote by August 28, 2018. Per PUP-1[1], are the >> voting options: >> >> +1: "Will benefit the project and should definitely be adopted." >> +0: "Might benefit the project and is acceptable." >> -0: "Might not be the right choice but is acceptable." >> -1: "I have serious reservations that need to be thought through and >> addressed." >> >> Thank you! >> >> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/pull/15 >> [1] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0001.md >> -------- >> Regards, >> >> Ina Panova >> Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. >> >> "Do not go where the path may lead, >> go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
