On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 08:02:06PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote: > On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > I think the thing is that I've seen the sms as slightly different than > > what it was originally posted as. So, I might be in the minority > > here. I think we are seeing two different views of what an sms should > > be. > > > > My -1 was non-veto, so it doesn't stop you. It just registers my > > dissent. -- justin > > The group has told me before that, since all code matters require a > consensus, -1 always means veto. If you really, really, really don't like > it but don't want to veto it, use -0.5 or -0.99 or something. =-) Only > in non-consensus-requiring matters do -1's count as "negative votes", but > those matters seem to only exist in administrative matters, not code > matters.
Exactly. -1 is a veto when it comes to code. And as a committer [Justin], you have veto rights. Non-committers can vote however they'd like. It is even encouraged. Their votes are non-binding, but it can help the committers decide on a plan of action. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
