httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Sutton <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apache-2.0 STATUS
Date Wed, 11 Feb 1998 15:52:54 GMT
On Mon, 9 Feb 1998, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> wrote:
> > pcs         98/02/09 03:10:32
> > 
> >   Modified:    .        STATUS
> >   Log:
> >   What a surprise.... more votes!
> 	:
> >           . use virtual functions for module hooks
> >   -     Status: Ben +1
> >   +     Status: Ben +1, Paul -1
> Erm, what is the justification for this veto, Paul?  Or was it
> a typo?

It is not a veto, it is a vote against the proposal. How else should a
vote *against* a proposal be recorded? A +0 signifies neutrality, so it
not acceptable. If we do not allow -1 votes on discussional items we end
up the a situation (as on some of the other items) have having three
propositions: For, Neutral, Against. If you want to change this proposal
into that format, and place me as a +1 in "Against", feel free. 

As for the reason, well, it is a bad idea to move to C++ (for all the
reasons that have been discussed repeatedly over the last couple of years)
and even badder to then make use of C++ "features" to implement an API
which we want to make available to all languages, including modules which
can still be written in C.

Paul Sutton, C2Net Europe          
Editor, Apache Week .. the latest Apache news

View raw message