On 9 April 2014 02:21, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9 April 2014 01:38, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: >> I suppose this will make it more obvious when voting has concluded, but it >> puts the result out of the actual vote thread. > > That's a pain - I'd not noticed that before. > > I'm a bit surprised that changing the subject has the effect of > breaking the threading. > I don't think that is supposed to happen. > > [Later] > It seems that Google mail has changed the way it handles changes of > subject, thereby breaking the threading. > > For an example of a [RESULT] mail (from Google) that is correctly > threaded, have a look at [1] > > If you click on the << to the left of Thread you can see that it is > properly threaded. > > Likewise in the mailbox display [2] - search for "based on RC2" > > However recent GMail replies no longer work properly. > > I suspect (hope) other e-mail clients don't break threading that way... > > [1] > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/200802.mbox/%3C55afdc850802240403n4d6f3ae7o5bfa09bc6c3b3a53%40mail.gmail.com%3E > [2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/200802.mbox/thread?2 > >> Someone reading the vote >> thread might not realize that the vote is closed if the result is not made >> a part of the thread. > > Indeed, but when the conventiion was established at Apache, it worked > as intended. > Shame on Google for breaking it!
BTW, it looks like GMail was changed some time after Dec 2013 [3] (qv. for proper threading) [3] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201312.mbox/%3c52c1b6a5.7000...@gmail.com%3E >> >> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:06 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The ASF convention is to change the subject line - as I have done here >>> - to make it easier to find the result in the e-mail archives (and in >>> user inboxes). >>> >>> Also the summary should please state whether there were any other >>> votes, even if there were none. >>> >>> On 8 April 2014 18:03, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > The vote has now closed! The results are: >>> > >>> > Positive binding votes: 4 >>> > Steven Gill >>> > Ian Clelland >>> > Michal Mocny >>> > Bryan Higgins >>> > >>> > The vote has passed >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Bryan Higgins <br...@bryanhiggins.net >>> >wrote: >>> > >>> >> +1 >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > +1. >>> >> > >>> >> > (I noticed for format of sha and md5 files changed (coho patch to >>> strip >>> >> > weird pgp formatting), but the format now doesn't match either >>> sha512sum >>> >> or >>> >> > pgp CLI tools. The contents do match so its fine) >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Ian Clelland <iclell...@chromium.org> >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > > +1, plugman looks good from here. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Steven Gill < >>> stevengil...@gmail.com> >>> >> > > wrote: >>> >> > > >>> >> > > > Please review and vote on the release of cordova-plugman. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > cordova-plugman@0.21.0 has been published here: >>> >> > > > *https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cordova/CB-6245/ >>> >> > > > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cordova/CB-6245/>* >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > The package was published from the corresponding git tag: >>> >> > > > cordova-plugman: 0.21.0 (b2f3a130d3) >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > Upon a successful vote I will upload plugman archive to dist/ and >>> >> > publish >>> >> > > > it to npm. I will then post a vote for the cordova-cli followed >>> by a >>> >> > > > corresponding blog post. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > Voting will go on for a minimum of 24 hours. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > I vote +1. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > >>> >> >>>
