The first step in allowing a real community to grow would be to wear the
project hat, participate in discussions as individual, and consider how to
enable changes vs. trying to block active community members that contribute
on their own time from taking the project forward.
Versioning and parallel
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Pramod Immaneni
wrote:
> >
> > Regarding procedural vote, the decision to start development towards new
> > major release is a longer term decision, not just code change.
> >
>
> Longer term decision does not mean procedural change. You can have changes
> that can
This vote was not done per process. The discussion was still on going. A
decision that is more of code impact (consensus) is being called a
procedural decision (majority vote). Moreover end of vote day/time was also
not called ahead of the vote to determine when the vote ends. These seem to
be a pr
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Amol Kekre wrote:
> This vote was not done per process. The discussion was still on going. A
> decision that is more of code impact (consensus) is being called a
> procedural decision (majority vote). Moreover end of vote day/time was also
> not called ahead of the
I have not seen any active discussion on the topic since Monday and I
don't see how a full consensus in the subject can be reached as no any
other solution is proposed other than to wait with no clear time-frame
when package names may be unified and follow Apache recommendation.
Thank you,
Vl
