On 17.02.2015 12:16, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On 17 February 2015 at 13:24, <stef...@apache.org> wrote: >> Author: stefan2 >> Date: Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015 >> New Revision: 1660342 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1660342 >> Log: >> * STATUS: Refer to new backport branch for r1590751 and unblock >> that entry. >> >> Modified: >> subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS >> >> Modified: subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS >> URL: >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS?rev=1660342&r1=1660341&r2=1660342&view=diff >> ============================================================================== >> --- subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS (original) >> +++ subversion/branches/1.8.x/STATUS Tue Feb 17 10:24:09 2015 >> @@ -133,6 +133,21 @@ Candidate changes: >> Votes: >> +1: rhuijben >> >> + * r1590751, r1660341 >> + Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable. >> + Justification: >> + svn SEGV reported by user. >> + Branch: >> + ^/subversion/branches/1.8.x-r1590751 >> + Votes: >> + +1 (without r1660341): philip, danielsh, rhuijben >> + -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time; >> + other queries -- see email thread) >> + +1 (without r1660341): danielsh (julianf: >> + I agree with your points on list, but +1ing anyway: >> + fixing this segfault in svn need not block on fixing >> + a similar segfault in svnadmin.) >> + >> Veto-blocked changes: >> ===================== >> >> @@ -162,20 +177,6 @@ Veto-blocked changes: >> +1: rhuijben, stefan2 >> -1: julianfoad (assertion failure on incomplete dir -- see email) >> >> - * r1590751 >> - Use empty, rather than NULL, config if default is unreadable. >> - Justification: >> - svn SEGV reported by user. >> - Votes: >> - +1: philip, danielsh, rhuijben >> - -0: julianfoad (prefer to fix all the programs at the same time; >> - other queries -- see email thread) >> - +1: danielsh (julianf: I agree with your points on list, but +1ing >> anyway: >> - fixing this segfault in svn need not block on fixing >> - a similar segfault in svnadmin.) >> - -1: kotkov (breaks the build on Windows -- should use SVN_INT_ERR() >> - instead of SVN_ERR()) > Stefan! > > Nevertheless that someone can consider this as a minor issue, you > can't just go around removing people's votes. [1] > > You may resolve it, but you have to wait for person who raised the > veto to withdrawn it once he review and test proposed solution. We > already have discussed this in the past [2] > > [1] http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto > [2] http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2014-08/0090.shtml
Indeed. Faux pas there. Please keep the veto in until Evgeny decides to change his vote. -- Brane
