On 2/29/2012 8:59 AM, André Malo wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 February 2012 04:11:35 William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>>
>> I withdraw this vote, reverting my position to -1, until collaboration and
>> respect for options and insights of fellow committers as well as project
>> decisions and votes can be consistently demonstrated.
> 
> I always thought, you'd have to provide technical reasons for -1 votes (?).

No, only for a veto.  My technical reason for this vote, although I don't need
one, is that Jim is the only other person voting +1 for mod_policy.  Technical
conclusion is that if there are no developers voting +1, there are no developers
committed to maintaining this code alongside minfrin and jim.

Which is to say, I withdraw my offer to collaborate or even review this code
based on minfrin's absolute inability to collaborate with a committee, as he
had evidenced in the ldap code dump, and now in a module dump that he forgot
to hold a vote.  He had 2 months to revert the firehose mis-commit, he failed.
This keeps me from work I need to be doing because I'm chasing out code dumps
from httpd.  Stupid.

This leaves him with a single collaborator?  1-2 man shows aren't encouraged,
and never acceptable in core repos/asf/httpd/httpd/.  No more votes +1 shows
there is no community behind these submissions, but we have subprojects and
sandboxes to offer ideas the runway to attract collaborators and a community.

It's the reason why mod_aspdotnet was ejected, and why mod_arm4, mod_ftp and
perhaps even mod_fcgid are all on their way out of the project as it is, unless
more committers participate in those subprojects.

Putting more code dumps into core httpd is not going to help create communities,
and it proves to be a major obstacle to getting any major.minor release out the
door when we get around to noticing that code was never reviewed on the way in.
Would I have anything to post if there were 10 +1's to accept minfrin's new
modules?  Of course not.  But as it stands, there are not 10 +1's, so there is
not sufficient trust in his submission to mainline it straight to core.

Reply via email to