On Dec 5, 2014 11:51 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > This is again a case of misleading characterization of the issue in hand. > > Sorry I don't believe it is. > > The board requires oversight on releases and that means Majority Approval (ie 3 binding +1 votes) the release only had 2 +1 binding votes. In this case it could be called into question if there were 3 binding votes or not if I carried over votes, so as RM I erred on the side of caution, again not unreasonable when legal matters are concerned. IMO it certainly wan't worth the time delay in involving legal (as the release has already been going on for a month) when the solution (get an extra vote) was minimal effort. > > > We have already in the past, voted to allow 'carry over' of votes for minor, non-code related changes. > > Yes but not changes like this to NOTICE files. > > > I know that nothing in the code changed, so I did not want to retest the entire > > package. > > So why not just vote +1? If you were confident there were no code changes, I don't think anyone would of had any issues of you voting +1 without retesting as were only minor changes to the code (3rd party XML file). And no one raised any objection to the 3rd +1 (which given the lack of detail) probably didn't involve retesting. > > > All this current vote does is remove that loophole. > > Well it depends how it's implemented it could be taken to mean that I only need to vote on one RC and then can request to carry over my vote for every other RC with going through the release vetting process and the RM has to accept it. I hope not but time will tell.
We can deal with that when such a situation arises. Let's move on, please. Thanks, Om > > Thanks, > Justin
