httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aram Mirzadeh <>
Subject Re: patch - vote
Date Sat, 10 Feb 1996 23:07:37 GMT
> It certainly is criteria for a veto -- producing a valid patch is not
> an OS problem.  Find the problem (if there is one), modify the patch,
> and move it to 72b.  That is why there is no deadline on patches,
> only patch votes.
> However, when someone does veto, they need to provide enough diagnostic
> information to find the problem.

I thought I did.. that's the stuff it throughs back at me, during the linking.
If Garey would like access to a linux system, get in touch with me... I have
no problem with giving him access.

> >>  I propose we change the rules of accepting/declining a patch as well... we
> >>  should change the decline of a patch from a single -1 vote to a minimum of
> >>  or 3 people, more and more people are getting involved, and a +5 -1 vote 
> >>  shouldn't make it a bad patch... if it's a OS thing okay, but just on marrit
> >>  no.
> No, -1 on changing the process.  If you want to change a veto, convince
> the vetoer.  It usually isn't difficult if everyone else feels the same.

Don't you think a 5/6 or a 7/9 needed to carry a patch would be better idea
than one person holding out on what ever reason?  ( this is if the patch is
good, and compiled clean? ) 


Aram Mirzadeh
MIS Manager				      Apache httpd team member
Qosina Corporation

You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without holding on.
                -- Dean Martin

View raw message