On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 5:23 PM G. P. B. <george.bany...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The thing is that by my recollections votes have already been extended.
> Mostly when there has been issues with the mailing list, or some outside
> event.
>
> Moreso, I don't think extending a vote will in most cases result in the
> outcome
> they want (acceptance), but I might be mistaken. In this case however it
> is a
> bit meaningless as it's already passing.
> So I think if there needs to be a discussion about clarifying the voting
> RFC
> document it should be made in a different thread.
>
> Best regards,
>
> George P. Banyard
>
You're right. Sorry, I didn't intend to start a debate (nor to be rude to
Levi), just being probably overly cautious ("better safe than sorry", I
remembered that some people challenged the validity of votes on the basis
of "bureaucratic" arguments in the past, and wanted to avoid that here)...
(In this case I personally find it reasonable, but who am I?)
Just in case, let's record that the result is currently 48:14 ;)
--
Guilliam Xavier
