Le mer. 5 mai 2021 à 17:44, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> a écrit : > > > > > On May 5, 2021, at 6:38 AM, Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Le mar. 4 mai 2021 à 02:49, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> a > > écrit : > >> > >> I apologize. I started another thread regarding the vote before seeing > >> this. > > > > No problem. > > > >> Maybe that will get more attention? > > > > It doesn't seem so. :-} > > > > IMHO, valid answers have been given to the statements/questions > > from people who didn't vote +1. > > The very low turnout makes the arithmetics of the result fairly > > subjective... > > > > The optimistic view is that > > 1. most people don't care (that the repository is created), > > 2. there is no reason to doubt the infos provided by actual users of > > those codes, > > 3. there is an embryo of a community (perhaps not viable, but only > > the future can tell...),[1] > > 4. the same kind of welcoming gestures should apply for the proposed > > contributions, as for the attempt to resuscitate "Commons Graph"[2], > > even if some of the PMC might arguably prefer another option. > > Regardless, following https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> indicates that this vote is > not going to pass.
How so? [It's not about a code change; and no "technical argument" can be invoked.] > You can’t assert lazy consensus on an explicit vote. If you had started this > as a lazy consensus vote it > is likely it would have still gotten a -1 vote since both Sebb and Emmanuel > have voice opposition. A "veto" does not apply here. Hence my remark on the "arithmetics" since the total tally is slightly "pro" although the PMC tally is slightly "con". Gilles > > Ralph > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
