lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development
Date Thu, 04 Mar 2010 18:57:00 GMT
Who knows - this isn't the official count - just a gauge of what has 
happened.

What the true votes of the *'s are remains to be seen - I wouldn't 
default them either way
as the voters seemed to think they can vote with a clause - we don't 
know what they would vote without. But right now they vote +1 with an 
asterisk.

Again this is not the official count - and when we get an official 
count, this would still have to then be ratified by the PMC.

On 03/04/2010 01:48 PM, Bill Au wrote:
> Wouldn't a vote with some kind of a clause be actually a 0 or -1 since the
> voter is not agreeing with the current vote in its entirety?
>
> My vote is -1.  I am actually for merging Lucene/Solr development but I feel
> that the current vote is too broad.  I would vote for syncing Solr releases
> to Lucene releases but not the other way around.
>
> Bill
>
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Mark Miller<markrmiller@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>    
>> For those trying to keep track of the current voting, here is a list of the
>> Lucene/Solr committers and what I have seen of their votes thus far:
>>
>> Bill Au
>> Doug Cutting
>> Otis Gospodnetić
>> Erik Hatcher
>> Chris Hostetter
>> Grant Ingersoll - +1*
>> Mike Klaas
>> Shalin Shekhar Mangar - +1
>> Ryan McKinley
>> Mark Miller - +1
>> Noble Paul - +1
>> Yonik Seeley - +1
>> Koji Sekiguchi - +1
>> Michael Busch
>> Doron Cohen
>> Mike McCandless - +1
>> Bernhard Messer
>> Robert Muir - +1
>> Uwe Schindler - +/-0
>> Wolfgang Hoschek
>> Patrick O'Leary
>> Andi Vajda - +1*
>> Karl Wettin
>> Simon Willnauer - +1
>>
>> * vote with some kind of clause (is that legal :) )
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Mark
>>
>> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>      
>    


-- 
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com




Mime
View raw message