Yes, David has already pointed to that. According to OpenJDK Bylaws,
only votes visible to all the alias members should be taken into
account, so the number of "Yes" votes is really 6...
Thanks,
Artem
On 3/12/2012 5:01 PM, Dmeetry Degrave wrote:
Artem, it seems not all votes have reached alias. If someone replied
from @oracle.com and was subscribed with old @sun.com, such replies
haven't passed to mail list.
thanks,
dmeetry
On 03/13/2012 01:22 AM, Artem Ananiev wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:26 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 13/03/2012 3:48 AM, Artem Ananiev wrote:
Voting for Oleg Pekhovskiy [1] is now closed.
Yes: 9
Veto: 0
Abstain: 9
I only see 6 emails with a Yes vote in the archive and no abstains.
"Abstain" value is a copy-paste typo :(
People who publicly voted "Yes": Alexander Zuev, Sergey Bylokhov, Kelly
O'Hair, Alexey Utkin, Anthony Petrov, Pavel Porvatov, Alexander
Potochkin, Dalibor Topic. One more person voted "Yes" privately, without
jdk8-dev in CC. So the right values should be:
Yes: 8
Veto: 0
Abstain: 0
Thanks,
Artem
Doesn't change the result but ...
David
-----
According to the Bylaws definition of Lazy Consensus, this is
sufficient to approve the nomination.
Artem
[1]
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8-dev/2012-February/000821.html
