This doesn’t seem to represent the responses very well. My vote shouldn’t be considered a +1 unless my interpretation of the proposal (as a PoC in a branch) was correct, and I saw no comment on that… in fact from this message it seems that is explicitly NOT what the vote was supposed to be about based on the comment that doing a PoC in a branch requires no vote.
Overall the vote proposal and discussion thread was very confusing, I don’t see how you could get any sort of vote count out of it… most people replied with multiple votes with different clarifications! This VOTE RESULT never should have been done, the vote should simply have been cancelled or reframed. -David > On 30 Apr 2015, at 00:55, Adrian Crum <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Here is the tally of the votes. This was a challenge because many replies > included votes for other things, so this tally represents my best effort at > counting votes for the original subject. > > PMC Members (Binding) > --------------------- > +0 | 2 (Adam Heath, Jacques Le Roux) > +1 | 1 (David Jones) > -1 | 3 (Nicolas Malin, Scott Gray, Jacopo Cappellato) > > > Others (non-Binding) > -------------------- > +0 | 1 (Adrian Crum) > -1 | 2 (Ron Wheeler, Martin Becker) > > The vote failed to pass with 3 -1 votes and 1 +1 vote. > > The replies included a discussion about creating a POC branch to explore the > subject further. That can be done without a vote, so I will consider this > vote closed. > > > Adrian Crum > Sandglass Software > www.sandglass-software.com > > On 4/26/2015 3:44 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >> As was discussed last week, there is some interest in replacing some (or >> all) of OFBiz with Moqui (http://www.moqui.org/framework/index.html). >> >> To the scope reasonable, I propose that we begin by converting the >> following parts of the OFBiz framework with Moqui: >> >> Entity Engine >> Service Engine >> Security >> >> Other parts of the OFBiz framework could be converted as well, but I >> think this would be a good starting point, and if is successful, then >> more of OFBiz can be converted later. >> >> I believe we can create a thunk component to help solve compatibility >> problems, but that is a separate discussion. I only mention it here in >> case compatibility concerns might influence a vote. >>
