apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] proposal for names of new binary usec impl(s)
Date Fri, 12 Jul 2002 19:41:31 GMT
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 02:15:49PM -0500, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Actually, it's also out of line.  If we have a vote in CVS, or even another
> vote present, you really shouldn't go instigating more confusing or
> conflicting votes to track, especially if it's not your proposal or patch.

Out of line? Point of order: please advise me as to when I may and
may not call a vote. I'm most interested in the what we call the new
implementation, and so I made a proposal with the names I like the best.

> And no, we haven't settled abstract or concrete contracts for the time
> scale, so no, it's hard to pick a name.

I don't understand this issue, please elaborate.

> The votes are in status.  Let's keep discussion on list and the tally
> in STATUS.  STATUS cannot continue to be a soapbox, and remain
> an effective summary of where the project is at.  If someone wants to
> start tracking a discussion in another cvs file (preferably the apr site
> or pmc repository, rather than our code repositories), that's fine by me.

The chaos that is in STATUS does not at all in my mind break down
the issues into bite-sized chunks. An alternative to voting on one
thing at a time is to have everyone come up with their own *huge*
proposal, with justification, and then to vote on them individually.
If someone else has a better way to work through this, please speak
up.

-aaron

Mime
View raw message