httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yoshiki Hayashi <yosh...@xemacs.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL-VOTE] Adopt lazy consensus for backports...
Date Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:08:12 GMT
"William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> writes:

>>And, that, I believe jeopardizes the overall quality of the code.  
>>And, I'm not willing to take that risk.
>
> I entirely agree - stability of the already-done version 2.0 is
> paramount to me.  However we need to make some edge case expections
> for that code which only one or two voulenteers are familiar with.
> e.g. Win32 service code is only known by 4 members, Novell by only
> one, and ldap only three of us ever pay attention.
>
> 'Platform maintainers' should have some way to get measurable and
> tested code improvements back into 2.0.

I have ambivalent feeling toward this.  If the same rules
were applied to docs project, Japanese translation would be
dead long time ago, at least on 2.0 branch.  Thanks to the
exception made for docs, 2.0 Japanese translations are
almost as good as 2.1 ones.  So I do understand the pain of
working on something not majority of people have interest.
It takes some time to get even one +1 (except the one from
the original translator) for Japanese translation because
only three people are working on Japanese translation and
only two of them are committers.

But I also want 2.0 to remain stable and seeing mod_rewrite
regression happened even with current model, it's hard for
me to tell which one is really better.  At the moment, I'm
+1 on this given that the waiting period is long enough.  As
I understand it, current proposal says that even -0 would
prevent the lazy consensus.  If no one is bothered enough to
give -0 on the matter, it probably should go in.

-- 
Yoshiki Hayashi

Mime
View raw message