I don't believe this vote was initiated prematurely. This has been debated for a long time, we've never really got complete agreement, but we've also never voted on it. This vote started directly from a thread that started on 22nd, (though that was spawned from an earlier thread), when discussion died down on the 26th I suggested calling this vote and clearly stated what the vote would be and that I'd wait to see if there was more discussion, I waited 2 days but there was no further discussion. What else can we do now other than have a vote?
To answer the specific question in this vote thread about "building extensions using multiple versions of kernel and how modules on different release schedules requiring different levels of kernel or plugins will be handled." - we do nothing. As discussed on the thread that started this vote for the next release at least there would only be a single version and all modules would be released together. Thats what this vote is voting for. We can revisit this again after we've got a release out. As I understand it this is a simple majority vote, to pass it needs at least 3 +1s and more +1s than -1s. It still has time left to run, please could people continue voting. ...ant On 3/29/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is an indication that the vote was initiated prematurely, before agreement was reached. I would suggest withdrawing it until individuals' concerns have been addressed unless we think this issue is irreconcilable and that a decision should be forced. -- Jeremy On Mar 28, 2007, at 3:24 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Jim, Meeraj, > > If the stream of -1's contnue, am afraid there isn't going to be a > single release at all. > > thx, > dims > > On 3/28/07, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Mar 28, 2007, at 12:51 AM, ant elder wrote: >> >> > Here's the vote on this I said [1] I'd start to get closure on this >> > issue. >> > >> > The proposal is to have top-level pom for the Java SCA project that >> > enables >> > building all the modules together - kernel, services, runtimes, >> > extensions >> > etc, and for that to work all those modules need to use the same >> > version >> > name. >> > >> > Here's my +1. >> > >> > ...ant >> > >> > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >> > msg16024.html >> >> >> >> There has been no proposal for how to resolve the issue about >> building extensions using multiple versions of kernel and how modules >> on different release schedules requiring different levels of kernel >> or plugins will be handled. >> >> Until we can come up with a solution for these issues, I feel I have >> to vote against the proposal. >> >> -1 >> >> Jim >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > -- > Davanum Srinivas :: http://wso2.org/ :: Oxygen for Web Services > Developers > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
