Justification is to not mingle small changes with refactoring and not
perform refactoring of this kind without adequate discussion. Both was
already conveyed on current PR and previous PR.
You did the right thing declaring your intent to merge without just pulling
the trigger, but you also need
Today, I saw the below -1 by Thomas,
https://github.com/apache/apex-malhar/pull/666 without the technical
justification.
Saumya, PR Author, has created a mail thread to discuss the justification,
but there was no comment in the mail thread.
So should we consider this as invalid -1?
On Thu, Aug
For -1 to be valid there *must* be *technical* justification(s) not to
proceed with the code change. Without such justification -1 is
considered to be void/invalid [1].
I don't see any possible *technical* justification not to proceed with
the package rename as it was done in the past by a
lace [1]. There are two options under vote
> out
> > of that discussion and for the first option there is a single -1. Use of
> -1
> > during voting (and veto on PR) when not showing up during the preceding
> > discussion is problematic.
> >
> > Thomas
> >
> > [1] ht
Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:54 AM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The discussion already took place [1]. There are two options under
> vote
> > > out
> > > > of that discussion and for the first option there is a single -1. Use
> > of
&
option there is a single -1. Use of -1
during voting (and veto on PR) when not showing up during the preceding
discussion is problematic.
Thomas
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/bd1db8a2d01e23b0c0ab98a785f6ee
9492a1ac9e52d422568a46e5f3@%3Cdev.apex.apache.org%3E
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1
; >
> > E:a...@datatorrent.com | M: 510-449-2606 | Twitter: @*amolhkekre*
> >
> > www.datatorrent.com
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:54 AM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The discussion already took place [1]. There are two options unde
<t...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > The discussion already took place [1]. There are two options under vote
> out
> > of that discussion and for the first option there is a single -1. Use of
> -1
> > during voting (and veto on PR) when not showing up during the preceding
>
org> wrote:
> The discussion already took place [1]. There are two options under vote out
> of that discussion and for the first option there is a single -1. Use of -1
> during voting (and veto on PR) when not showing up during the preceding
> discussion is problematic.
>
&
The discussion already took place [1]. There are two options under vote out
of that discussion and for the first option there is a single -1. Use of -1
during voting (and veto on PR) when not showing up during the preceding
discussion is problematic.
Thomas
[1] https://lists.apache.org
Hi,
Votes are only valid on code modifications with a reason. [1]
However it looks to me that there’s not consensus and which way forward is best
I would suggest cancelling the vote and having a discussion of the benefit or
not of making the change.
Thanks,
Justin
1.
According to [1] unless the veto is followed by a technical
justification showing why the change is bad it is considered to be an
invalid or void veto. Technically project may continue with or without
the modification and nothing bad will happen. In addition, maven
supports project relocation
12 matches
Mail list logo
