Indeed, at least he has one candidate :)
For the -1s though, there was a piece missing ("Please justify any veto as
otherwise it is non binding."). So if he really dislikes all those options,
it would be nice to provide some justification.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Manfred Baedke <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Oliver voted +1 for oak-segment-tar. :)
>
>
> On 4/28/2016 1:43 PM, Francesco Mari wrote:
>
>> Hi Oliver,
>>
>> If I understand your mail correctly, you gave a -1 to every proposed
>> option. Can you be a little bit more constructive about your approach, or
>> explain the message that is evidently hidden in your email?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Francesco
>>
>> 2016-04-28 11:43 GMT+02:00 Oliver Lietz <[email protected]>:
>>
>> On Monday 25 April 2016 16:46:45 Michael Dürig wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> There is a couple of names that came up in the discussion [1]:
>>>>
>>>> oak-local-store
>>>> oak-segment-file
>>>> oak-embedded-store
>>>> oak-segment-store
>>>> oak-segment-tar
>>>> oak-segment-next
>>>>
>>>> Please vote which of the above six options you would like to see as the
>>>> final name for oak-segment-next [2]:
>>>>
>>>> Put +1 next to those names that you favour, put -1 to veto names and
>>>> remove the remaining names. Please justify any veto as otherwise it is
>>>> non binding.
>>>>
>>>> The name with the most +1 votes and without any -1 vote will be chosen.
>>>>
>>> oak-local-store -1
>>> oak-segment-file -1
>>> oak-embedded-store -1
>>> oak-segment-store -1
>>> oak-segment-tar +1
>>> oak-segment-next -1
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> O.
>>>
>>> The vote is open for the next 72 hours.
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://markmail.org/thread/ktk7szjxtucpqd2o
>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4245
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
