David Zwiers wrote:
I'm cautiouly giving a +0 (last time I looked at this, well there were
flaws ...)
The flaws you were worried about are still there, with respect to
visitor and iterator code both being present.
> > 6. Feature Model update from gabriel
This had major problems last ti
> > 2. Vote of splitting up Main for Coverage (from Martin etc)> +1 See split described in jody's email
+0 (I'll try to take time to review)
+1
> > 3. Merge of Aggregate changes (corey)> +1 going ahead months of warning given+0 (know little about this, but if warning was given and votes we
Apologies for not making meetings lately.
Quoting Jody Garnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Jody Garnett wrote:
> > Agenda:
> > 1. Vote of Renderer changes (from dblasby)
> +1
+1
> > 2. Vote of splitting up Main for Coverage (from Martin etc)
> +1 See split described in jody's email
+0 (I'll try to
Jody Garnett a écrit :
1. Vote of Renderer changes (from dblasby)
+1 for letting David performs the needed changes without having
J2D-renderer in the way (just copies modified file in a legacy package
in the legacy module if needed).
2. Vote of splitting up Main for Coverage (from Martin e
Jody Garnett wrote:
Agenda:
1. Vote of Renderer changes (from dblasby)
+1
2. Vote of splitting up Main for Coverage (from Martin etc)
+1 See split described in jody's email
3. Merge of Aggregate changes (corey)
+1 going ahead months of warning given
4. cbrewer followup
+1 ext/brewer to
