At 07:31 PM 2/28/2005, Curt Arnold wrote:
On Feb 28, 2005, at 12:14 PM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
Curt, your -1 vote is duly registered as blocking and valid. As per our bylaws [1], a lazy majority, that is three (3) +1 votes and more +1 votes than -1 votes, is required to unblock the situation.
I hereby formally request the committers to cast their vote so we can move forward.
<vote> [X] Accept the additions to the Appender interface [ ] Refuse those additions [ ] Abstain </vote>
Usually 72 hours are allocated for votes. I think leaving the ballot open until Friday evening should allow everyone to participate. Many thanks in advance,
The additions to the Appender interface were only part of my objections. The others were the renaming of AppenderSkeleton.activateOptions to AppenderSkeleton.activate and the new requirement that extensions of AppenderSkeleton have activateOptions called. I do not know whether you intend to have separate votes on those issues or if this vote was intended to covers all of those issues.
This vote was intended to cover all issues in relation to the additions/changes to the Appender interface. Please consider the term "additions" to cover changes as well, in particular the replacement of the activateOptions() method by activate().
-- Ceki Gülcü
The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
