On 08/04/2011 09:47 PM, Blair Zajac wrote: > On the veto issue, it's odd that Greg is veto a revert of a commit change > that originally occurred on trunk and is now sitting on the branch. It > does seem odd one can veto the move back to the original default > implementation. > > Just wondering, couldn't we veto the commit that made serf the default?
Eh... sounds like politickin'... let's not go there, please. The Subversion committers have consistently demonstrated a keen ability (and desire) to work out our differences quickly and without even resorting to something as formal as a vote. I mean, I can count on one hand the number of such votes ... maybe on one finger, even! I'm not even quite sure that a call for vote in this situation was really necessary, as we already have a mechanism in place for addressing the technical question before us (the 1.7.x/STATUS voting system). To the degree that we can avoid resorting to mere rule-by-the-majority and continue working toward peaceful consensus, the greater Subversion community benefits. -- C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net> CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
