On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 13/02/2013 Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> >> I will ask everyone to take a break for two weeks before starting the >> voting procedure for this. > > > Fine. I would have started the vote earlier, but it's your code so I'll > respect your choice. And it's good to give people more time to think (not to
We had a committer veto. Why are having a vote? A -1 from a commmitter is not something we vote on. The patch needs to be reverted, now. -Rob > write!) about the impact of this change, which can perfectly stay in daily > builds at the moment... maybe someone will find more significant examples of > spreadsheets relying on the result of 0 ^ 0. > > I won't reply to recent discussions on this thread since the point is not to > explain to people what "implementation-defined" means or investigate what > the several branches of mathematics use. > > >> Independently of the vote result I will be effectively stopping the >> development work I intended to do on Calc as I have lost all >> interest on improving it given the current situation. > > > This is sad, but understandable. Anyway, as Juergen clarified, contributions > are always welcome; it is really rare that code (assuming that people who > posted to this thread did read the code...) gets this level of public > discussion and most of the proposed improvements should be uncontroversial, > so when you feel like to hack on Calc again just do it (sending a note here > before any backwards-incompatible changes) and everybody will be happy, > hopefully! > > Regards, > Andrea.
