I wasn't closing the vote, just posting the current status ;-) /Anne
On 13. jan. 2010, at 11.17, Richard Hirsch wrote: > Please note that the vote officially lasts 72 hours. We can't close > the vote until then. > > D. > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Just to sum up the vote so far. >> >> ESME PPMC +1: 6 >> IMPC +1: 3 >> IMPC -1: 1 >> >> We would need one more IMPC +1 vote to ratify the ESME team vote right? >> >> /Anne >> >> >> >> On 13. jan. 2010, at 09.07, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Gianugo Rabellino >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> ... In the future should this issue ever present itself to you, >>>>> I hope you will do the proper thing and point the errant person >>>>> at the relevant ASF policy >>>> >>>> That would be the same policy that says we _must_ remove copyright >>>> notices from source files, right? The same policy that is now being >>>> discarded in light of a compromise that makes very little sense and >>>> sets a dangerous precedent?... >>> >>> I don't think we're discarding the policy. >>> >>> David is prevented from making any more commits that contradict this >>> policy (as he left, but otherwise I would have asked for a vote to >>> revoke his commit rights as suggested on the legal-disccus list), and >>> we are treating the remaining copyright notices in the same way as >>> we'd do for a committer that is no longer available (for any reason) >>> to fix them themselves. >>> >>> Clarifying that we'd revoke people's commit rights if they refuse to >>> abide by the policy that we're talking about >>> (http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html) has been a positive >>> outcome of this saga, IMHO. >>> >>> -Bertrand >> >>
