On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:57PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > Cos, I see your point, but I think this one falls under procedural issue, > no?
Not really. We are talking about a use of a tool to improve the review process. Dictating a tool would be a step to a wrong direction. It's like imposing the use of IDEA and banishing all Eclipse users (although, I wouldn't mind really ;) Dictation of a development technology is where the rift happens, IMO. But when we are on the same page as the result of the consensus, rather than a fiat - that's a different story. Cos k On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > > What are we voting for this? > > > > Fortunately, Apache isn't about democracy. [1] > > > > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > > > Cos > > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 01:08PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > > > Following the discussion on Upsource [1], > > > I would like to call a vote on accepting it as our official code review > > > tool. > > > > > > [ ] +1 approve > > > [ ] +0 no opinion > > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) > > > > > > This vote will go on for 5 days. > > > > > > [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble. > > > com/Code-Review-Tool-Proposal-Upsource-td12195.html > >
