commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Libbrecht <>
Subject Re: [jelly][vote] APT tag library
Date Mon, 19 Dec 2005 09:16:48 GMT
I'm slowly catching up on this.
Maybe we need to have life with Ryan a bit longer before becoming a 
In order to send a fully fledged component proposal, Ryan, dare I ask 
whether you've posted a jira issue already ?
This is really needed for all to look at.



robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 09:48 -0700, Ryan Heaton wrote:
>> I'm adjusting the thread subject to reflect the fact that there is a vote going on
for two things:
>> 1. Acceptance of the new APT tag library (described below)
>> 2. Acceptance of me as a committer to support the new apt tag library, if it gets
>> So far, I have recorded three people voting positive for both proposals:
>> Dion Gillard
>> Hans Gilde
>> Paul Libbrecht
> hi ryan
> (sorry to have to start being a little legalistic...)
> i know that this can be a little confusing but there are votes and
> VOTEs...
> both of these need to be official ASF votes. these need more formality
> that just vague +1's against your proposal. the subject should be [VOTE]
> (jelly isn't necessary since VOTEs are commons-wide and may result in
> some filters not recognising your post as a vote thread). 
> we're really only getting up to speed with the new processes for
> accepting code which is not original so you might need a little
> patience. so, apologies in advance...
> i'm not sure there's any consensus about the best way to approach
> software grants but i'd expect to understand the provinence of the
> donated code before i'd be willing to +1. i'd also expect a jelly
> committer to start the VOTE thread.
> it's not really possible to have conditional approval for a committer
> and it's poor netiquette to nominate yourself as a committer. 

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message