Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 78915 invoked from network); 17 Mar 2005 20:18:19 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Mar 2005 20:18:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 521 invoked by uid 500); 17 Mar 2005 20:18:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 465 invoked by uid 500); 17 Mar 2005 20:18:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 451 invoked by uid 99); 17 Mar 2005 20:18:16 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from thunderer.concentric.net (HELO thunderer.cnchost.com) (207.155.252.72) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:18:15 -0800 Received: from rcsv650.rowe-clan.net (c-24-13-128-132.client.comcast.net [24.13.128.132]) by thunderer.cnchost.com id PAA23129; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 15:18:05 -0500 (EST) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.17] Errors-To: Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050317140740.0336b010@pop3.rowe-clan.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:14:49 -0600 To: Justin Erenkrantz From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." Subject: Re: APR-Iconv 1.0.2 Released Cc: Paul Querna , dev@apr.apache.org In-Reply-To: <98958094B8083DD0D7AB48BF@st-augustin.ics.uci.edu> References: <4239BB1B.50305@force-elite.com> <6.2.1.2.2.20050317131349.0336f4c0@pop3.rowe-clan.net> <98958094B8083DD0D7AB48BF@st-augustin.ics.uci.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 01:54 PM 3/17/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >--On Thursday, March 17, 2005 1:25 PM -0600 "William A. Rowe, Jr." wrote: > >>I have done a search against pmc@ and apr@. Justin 'amended' >>his +1 to include 1.0.2. Nobody else did so (some explicitly >>did not vote on this item). >> >>I'm explicitly voting -1 against a 1.0.2 release. Curt's issue >>is explicitly harmful to apr-iconv users. There is a (rather large) >>breakage that seems has been deliberately ignored by an overeager RM. > >Paul explicitly posted a tally yesterday afternoon and you didn't bring this up then. Nowhere can I find you saying -1 for apr-iconv, so your -1 is news to me and probably to Paul as well. What was insufficiently explicit about William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > -1 for apr-util / apr-iconv. which Paul replied to? I then replied +1 to apr. Only apr. This problem doesn't impact either apr nor apr-util, only apr-iconv. Paul's Tally subject was 1.1.1. It was not 1.0.2 It did not contain the text iconv. Most individuals who voted did NOT vote on apr-iconv. Some voted only on apr. Some voted on both apr, apr-util, and did not vote on apr-iconv. >Additionally, I maintain that this isn't a regression. So, my +1 still stands. Oh, I'm counting your +1, my -1. Presuming the RM voted +1 since he rolled it, I get 1 vote. Not 3. This is an absolute violation of our charter and operating guidelines. With that, the counter is at four hours, and I will pull down this apr-iconv tarball unless the vote concludes in favor of this tarball.