incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Acceptance of the OpenOffice.org Proposal
Date Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:53:02 GMT
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:20 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote on Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 18:34:46 -0400:
>> Don't lecture me on voting, Gavin.  Read the the "Apache Voting
>> Process" [1], the section on "Implications of Voting", with my
>> emphasis:
>
> You are being incredibly rude, and also incredibly out of line to teach
> ASF Members (for the second time in a day) how voting works.
>

Daniel, I'm not teaching you anything you don't know.  I'm just
reminding you of how voting actually works at Apache.

I'll draw your attention to when the OOo incubation proposal was sent
out, Sam sent out a ballot like this [1]:

"Please cast your votes:

[  ] +1 Accept OpenOffice.org for incubation
[  ] +0 Indifferent to OpenOffice.org incubation
[  ] -1 Reject OpenOffice.org for incubation

This vote will close 72 hours from now."


However, the votes that were returned were [2]:

"Binding:

 +1: 41
--: 1
-0: 1
-1: 5

Non-binding:
+1: 45
+0: 2
┬▒0: 1
-0: 1
-1: 8 "

I did not see any complaints at the time about how the votes were
cast, including of the -0 from an IPMC member.

Regards,

-Rob


[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3C4DF24024.2040709@intertwingly.net%3E
[2] http://markmail.org/message/ge5kh7yygl77ehha

Mime
View raw message