On 05.08.2011 04:52, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > 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.
Speaking of politicking, I don't see any technical explanation for Greg's veto in the 1.7.x STATUS, which causes me to wonder why anyone is treating it as valid in the first place. -- Brane
