Hi Zeev, Now we're into arguing semantics of the Voting RFC. Whether you meant something else when you wrote that is now irrelevant, it's what is written that is the rule, not somebodies individual interpretation surely? "In any meaning full way" are your words, not what the accepted RFC states.
>From what's been said previously, the changes in NG are strictly implementation changes, i.e. syntax etc remains the same throughout. That's great, and would require a 50%+1 for vote as far as I can see. However. If there are /any/ changes to what end-users would see, that is by definition a change in the language, no matter how small (or "meaningless"), you are into 2/3 majority territory. So, can those who have worked on it confirm with a simple yes / no, are there changes (right now) that may affect users. Second, if the answer is "no", is there somebody that can review and confirm that this is the case that hasn't worked on NG preferably (not because of trust, just because it's a large changeset which makes it easy to miss stuff and a fresh pair of eyes is good). Now. If yes, 2/3 majority is required. It's as simple as that. If no, then I would suggest starting the review to confirm. I would hope that the remaining time in the 2 weeks would be enough to accomplish a review, but somebody correct me if they think otherwise, so the vote start / end should hopefully be unaffected beyond vote requirements. Cheers. Jonny.
