Howard M. Lewis Ship: +1 (binding)
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Ulrich Stärk u...@spielviel.de wrote:
Ulrich Stärk: +0 (binding)
For the same reasons as stated before.
On 2014-05-18 18:29, Jochen Kemnade wrote:
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with
To get on with this, Jochen please change your vote to binding and close
the vote as successful. We don't want to be paralyzed by non-voting when
there are no votes against.
Kalle
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Howard Lewis Ship hls...@gmail.com wrote:
Howard M. Lewis Ship: +1 (binding)
I thought that only PMC members can cast binding votes, so, if none of the
others vote +1, the vote will eventually fail?
On Thu, 22 May 2014 15:58:09 -0300, Jochen Kemnade kemn...@gmail.com
wrote:
I thought that only PMC members can cast binding votes,
That's correct.
so, if none of the others vote +1, the vote will eventually fail?
I guess lazy consensus apply here. If I'm correct, the answer is no, it
Right, that's the principle but not a strict requirement. I don't want us
to get stuck with procedural issues. Voting is supposed to help us with
coding, not prevent it. We don't vote on all code changes and in this case,
we wanted to ask the community's opinion and it looks we have it. We can go
Andreas Andreou: +1 (binding)
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Kalle Korhonen
kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, that's the principle but not a strict requirement. I don't want us
to get stuck with procedural issues. Voting is supposed to help us with
coding, not prevent it. We don't
Am 22.05.2014 21:30, schrieb Andreas Andreou:
Andreas Andreou: +1 (binding)
Phew, thanks, that makes it easier. :-)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Ulrich Stärk: +0 (binding)
For the same reasons as stated before.
On 2014-05-18 18:29, Jochen Kemnade wrote:
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with Java 5
for the upcoming
5.4 release. Java 5 is EOSL since October 2009. While requiring Java 6 would
not bring
Can other PMC members please weigh in here. Jochen, no reason to close the
vote till you have a binding majority decision either way.
Kalle
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Kristian Marinkovic
kristian.marinko...@gmail.com wrote:
Kristian Mairnkovic: +1 (non-binding)
i don't see any reason
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo: +1 (binding)
Again, I only see a Java 8 T5.5 if it's a separate JAR.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
-
To unsubscribe,
Andreas Ernst: +1 (non-binding)
Am 18.05.14 18:29, schrieb Jochen Kemnade:
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with
Java 5 for the upcoming 5.4 release.
Java 5 is EOSL since October 2009.
While requiring Java 6 would not bring us much benefits, there might be
some
Lance Semmens +0 (non-binding)
I can't really see much benefit but I won't stand in the way.
On 18 May 2014 18:05, Jochen Kemnade kemn...@gmail.com wrote:
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with
Java 5 for the upcoming 5.4 release.
Java 5 is EOSL since October
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Jochen Kemnade kemn...@gmail.com wrote:
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with
Java 5 for the upcoming 5.4 release.
Java 5 is EOSL since October 2009.
While requiring Java 6 would not bring us much benefits, there might be
some
Bob Harner: +1 (non-binding)
On May 18, 2014 1:05 PM, Jochen Kemnade kemn...@gmail.com wrote:
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with
Java 5 for the upcoming 5.4 release.
Java 5 is EOSL since October 2009.
While requiring Java 6 would not bring us much benefits,
Kristian Mairnkovic: +1 (non-binding)
i don't see any reason not to raise the minimun requirement to 1.6. i've to
admit most of my Tapestry apps run on Java 1.6. anyways.
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Bob Harner bobhar...@gmail.com wrote:
Bob Harner: +1 (non-binding)
On May 18, 2014 1:05
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with
Java 5 for the upcoming 5.4 release.
Java 5 is EOSL since October 2009.
While requiring Java 6 would not bring us much benefits, there might be
some libraries that we cannot use because they do not support Java 5.
Also, we'd
Kalle Korhonen: +1 (non-binding)
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Jochen Kemnade kemn...@gmail.com wrote:
There have been discussions whether we want to keep compatibility with
Java 5 for the upcoming 5.4 release.
Java 5 is EOSL since October 2009.
While requiring Java 6 would not bring us
17 matches
Mail list logo
