>>  -1 to i18n and typesafe logging for version one.
>> 
> 
> Lincoln, why you hatin' on type-safe logging? Brother, hook me up with a +1
> :)
> 
> -Dan
> 

Hehe, that's the nice thing here at Apache. 
Since we only discuss those things on strictly technical levels we are still 
all brothers, even if we get some -1 sometimes :)

Don't worry Dan, if there are diverse opinions, then we have passed the test 
for the first lesson: free thinking :) 

Having some +1 and -1 in an early discussion phase only means one thing: we 
need more arguments.

Lincoln, most of the times (at least if you see that a few people already 
casted +1 for some idea) it's very helpful if you underline your -1 with 
technical arguments means "_why_ you don't like type-safe logging" and/or the 
requirements you would have for such a feature to be successful.

Most votes here are majority votes [1], but I've seen it many times that (even 
after there are already lots of +1 on the table) a single person outlined a 
problem and did cast -1. And if the argument is valid, it's pretty often the 
case that the others recall their +1 and change it to -1 as well.

It's really all about the arguments.

LieGrue,
strub

[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

Reply via email to