Sorry if I am missing something, but why exactly a re-vote would be needed? Any references to bylaws dictating it? ;)
Cos On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 04:09PM, Bruno MahИ wrote: > On 09/09/2011 04:02 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Bruno MahИ <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Reverting to what? -1 or -/+0? > >> > >> CentOS6 and openSUSE are still *very* important platforms we should > >> support. > >> And as we agreed, I will run build and tests on all openSUSE and Fedora > >> once a week. I can also handle CentOS6. > >> > >> If we add CentOS5 that's great, but I would rather close that vote first > >> and then add centos5 when we get the resource up and running. > >> > >> I don't want to take the chance to loose support for CentOS6 or > >> openSUSE. It would be a lot more work to re-introduce them than keeping > >> them working. > > Personally, I think we should add CentOS 5 back and call it a day for 0.2.0. > > > > Thanks, > > Roman. > > I don't mind but after all these changes we would probably need to call > another vote, wouldn't we? > > I would rather close that one since most people have agreed so far and > make another vote for CentOS5. > It does not impede on anything would be less confusing that way.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
