Ok, if that's what it takes to avoid further confusion, I'll second (or third) a new vote, but all the points you raise have been discussed and the resulting consensus conforms with the points you want to add/amend in the new vote.
Note also that Parsley also seems to be on the point of being donated, so all the 'endorsment' worries seem premature and unnecessary. A point of procedure: can you add a 'binding' vote AFTER the result has been called? EdB On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > My count is now three binding -1's. Igor Costa, Jeff Tapper, and Om. I > guess I'll add a fourth. Jeff qualified his vote, but it still reads as > -1 because it isn't right to assume he accepts your interpretation of the > proposal. Jeff should change his vote if he is convinced. > > The amount of discussion and confusion by others that we are not picking > Swiz as the favorite and that Parsley and other app frameworks are > welcome, makes me make another plea to re-do this vote. Reading some of > these posts make it clear to me that folks have different ideas of what is > going to happen in the future. I'm still unclear whether Swiz AOP code is > going to be moved into the framework or not. I thought we were going to > warehouse Swiz, but instead, it appears that Carlos wants to make a set of > significant improvements to Swiz, which is fine, but might be what makes > people think we're endorsing or playing favorites. > > Yes, you have the numbers to forge ahead, but we are told to consider the > number of -1's. > > I would recommend a proposal that states clearly that > > 1) Swiz goes in its own repo. The original proposal says it could go into > a folder under utilities, but I think flexunit is a better model. > 2) Swiz will have active development but release separately from the SDK. > The activity level isn't quite clear from the original proposal. People > need to be comfortable that this activity isn't an endorsement or > favoritism. > 3) Acceptance of Swiz is not an endorsement or favoritism. > 4) Any other app framework is welcomed to be donated via the same process. > > It would make me much happier to have a vote thread with just +1's or -1's > without qualifications. > > -Alex > > On 6/1/13 10:19 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>I am sorry, but I voted a -1 binding as well and my concerns have not been >>addressed. >> >>If we are going to go ahead, can we at least bring it into a contrib >>folder >>and make at least one release out of it before promoting it to a main >>repo? >> >>Thanks, >>Om >>On Jun 1, 2013 10:07 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> >>wrote: >> >>> Ok Erik, >>> >>> I see it ok as well. As you said there's only one -1 binding vote (Igor >>> Costa) and one -1 non binding vote (Carlos Velasco), and it was already >>> explained the motivations behind the donation and the intention to >>>maintain >>> swiz out of main flex-sdk cycle and not promote it as the preferred >>>mvc-ioc >>> microarquitecture. >>> >>> So for me it's ok, if it's ok for the rest of people here. >>> >>> Hope Chris could send us that email soon regarding it's intention of >>>donate >>> the source code and wiki >>> >>> Thanks to you Erik as well for clearing things here. >>> >>> >>> Carlos >>> >>> >>> >>> 2013/6/1 Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> >>> >>> > I think this is a valid vote and there is no need to declare it >>> > invalid. There is only one definite, binding -1 (Igor) and he declined >>> > to explain his motivation, something that is customary when casting a >>> > negative vote. >>> > >>> > Once Chris Scott 'officially' donates Swiz - there are some hoops he >>> > has to jump through, but we'll get to those when he contacts us- we >>> > can create a new repo for it: either a general 'flex-contrib/swiz' or >>> > a specific one, like 'flex-swiz', we need to discuss that a bit more, >>> > I think. >>> > >>> > Thank you Carlos for managing the vote and keeping track of this >>> donation. >>> > >>> > EdB >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Carlos Rovira >>> Director de Tecnología >>> M: +34 607 22 60 05 >>> F: +34 912 94 80 80 >>> http://www.codeoscopic.com >>> http://www.directwriter.es >>> http://www.avant2.es >>> > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
