+1 zenghui
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Georg Kunz <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dovetailers, > > > > You are all well aware of the accidental merge of the SDNVPN test case > scope and description [1] without a +1 vote from a majority of the > committers. We have discussed how to handle this already a few times, but > we have not yet reached an officially documented conclusion. Since I caused > the mishap, I’d like to work towards a clean resolution of the situation by > calling for an official vote. We couldn’t have a vote on IRC during the > last call due to a lack of quorum, so we agreed to move to an email-based > vote. > > > > There are basically two options for resolving situation: > > > > i) Revert the merged patchset. This includes creating > an inverse patchset which again needs to be voted on by committers in order > to get it merged > > ii) Approve the patchset post-merge > > > > There are currently 9 committers in Dovetail. I won’t vote myself for > obvious reasons. So, I propose the following procedure: > > > > Please cast your vote on the following question: > > > > “Do the Dovetail committers approve the merge of the SDNVPN test case > scope and description [patchset 34343]? (-1, 0, +1)” > > > > If at least 5 committers (not counting myself) vote +1, the patchset is > considered approved and we’ll keep it. If less than 5 committers vote +1 or > there are -1 votes, I’ll prepare an inverse patch. > > > > [1] https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/34343/ > > > > Sorry for causing extra effort. > > > > Thanks, > > Georg > > _______________________________________________ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
