I agree with John.
Monday, November 8, 2010, 3:27:55 PM, you wrote:
> I have a couple concerns.
> Primarily with Consensus definition. I think we need to say that if you
> don't
> respond within a particular time (1 week) then you obtain. I wouldn't want
> to have folks who have vanished hol
Hi all,
I'd like to propose the following upcoming releases:
v2.1.4 - Current trunk, with all changes and fixes as of recent [date:
imminent]
v2.1.5 - Examine the bugs targeted for this release, and add / move /
remove as necessary (this is a task for everyone). I'd like to take this
oppor
Sounds good to me.
john
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> On 11/08/2010 03:41 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree that it could be a problem to have a single veto. Perhaps lazy
>> consensus falling back to 2/3 majority?
>>
>
> Sounds too complicated IMO. :)
>
> We cou
On 11/08/2010 03:41 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
I agree that it could be a problem to have a single veto. Perhaps lazy
consensus falling back to 2/3 majority?
Sounds too complicated IMO. :)
We could just do lazy consensus in the bylaws for now, for the release
artifacts, and if it ever become
I agree that it could be a problem to have a single veto. Perhaps lazy
consensus falling back to 2/3 majority?
john
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>
> Secondly, I am wondering if Majority is the correct way to do a release.
>> Seems
>> to me a release is a significant e
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> On 11/08/2010 02:27 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
>
>> I have a couple concerns.
>>
>> Primarily with Consensus definition. I think we need to say that if you
>> don't
>> respond within a particular time (1 week) then you obtain. I wouldn't
>>
On 11/08/2010 02:27 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
I have a couple concerns.
Primarily with Consensus definition. I think we need to say that if you
don't
respond within a particular time (1 week) then you obtain. I wouldn't want
to have folks who have vanished hold up a "consensus".
Actually, re
On 11/08/2010 02:27 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
I have a couple concerns.
Primarily with Consensus definition. I think we need to say that if you
don't
respond within a particular time (1 week) then you obtain. I wouldn't want
to have folks who have vanished hold up a "consensus".
Agreed, so s
Folks still have to vote on whether or not it is ready. Typically a vote
against
means that there is some critical bug which should be fixed before release.
I'd like to think that we err on the side of conservatism as if you need a
particular feature you can always resort to svn.
john
On Mon, N
should not the technical expediency and readiness of a system dictate
its release ?
On Mon, 2010-11-08 at 13:27 -0800, John Plevyak wrote:
> I have a couple concerns.
>
> Primarily with Consensus definition. I think we need to say that if you
> don't
> respond within a particular time (1 week)
Abstain... damn those spell checkers
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:27 PM, John Plevyak wrote:
>
> I have a couple concerns.
>
> Primarily with Consensus definition. I think we need to say that if you
> don't
> respond within a particular time (1 week) then you obtain. I wouldn't
> want
> to have f
I have a couple concerns.
Primarily with Consensus definition. I think we need to say that if you
don't
respond within a particular time (1 week) then you obtain. I wouldn't want
to have folks who have vanished hold up a "consensus".
Secondly, I am wondering if Majority is the correct way to d
Great, sounds good. I just wanted to make sure we don't do anything that would
risk losing our CoAdvisor privileges, since it is a very useful tool.
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 8, 2010, at 3:11 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
>
> On 8 Nov 2010, at 01:29, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>
>> On 11/07/2010 06:21 PM, Ni
On 8 Nov 2010, at 01:29, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
> On 11/07/2010 06:21 PM, Nick Kew wrote:
>> A while back I put httpd's mod_proxy through the coadvisor test suite[1] and
>> fixed a
>> bunch of protocol violations, most of them pedantic edge-cases.
>>
>> I've just put trafficserver's forward proxy
14 matches
Mail list logo
