Barney,
Barney Boisvert wrote:
>With the implementation as is, UnanimousBased doesn't allow voters to
>"screw up" by voting affirmatively if they'd approve some of the
>config attributes but deny others. Since they come in one at a time,
>any denials will guaranteed to result in an overall denia
I can't right now, I'm in Munich for the Oktoberfest and I can't
guarantee my accuracy ;)
I'll check for your commits by the weekend in case you already started it.
On 9/26/06, Ben Alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> 1.0.2 is now ready to release. Carlos, were you still able to take care
With the implementation as is, UnanimousBased doesn't allow voters to
"screw up" by voting affirmatively if they'd approve some of the
config attributes but deny others. Since they come in one at a time,
any denials will guaranteed to result in an overall denial. It's not
much of a difference, bu
Okay, thanks! That's what I thought but since it affected a non-CAS
class I wanted to be sure.
-Scott
Ben Alex wrote:
> Scott Battaglia wrote:
>
>> Ben,
>>
>> I've been looking at SEC-348
>>
>
> Hi Scott
>
> I read through the issue in more detail and made the following comment.
> I ha
Hi all
1.0.2 is now ready to release. Carlos, were you still able to take care
of it? I can do so, but I won't have time for a few more days. Please
feel free to remove the reference guide and README.TXT sections that
mention JAR signing. I think we've agreed to drop it.
Cheers
Ben
-
