and that can easily be expressed with a +0 i dont like it but not enough to block
-igor On 12/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just doing it as the manual says :) If you get 3 times -0.5 votes, that may be a strong indicator that it is not the way to go. IIUC part of voting is the ability to disagree, either mildly, strongly, or even unresolvable. This is reflected by the analog votes. In this case, I don't want to block a consensus on the proposal (if one is attained), but do think that the current situation serves us well. i.e. if everyone else agrees to remove final from these methods, I won't block it. That doesn't mean that I agree with the proposal, nor that I don't care. I care enough to say that I don't agree, but don't want to stop the show. Martijn On 12/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > that has got to be one of the most idiotic things i have ever seen. > > so what does this mean? > > +1 -0.5 -0.5 -0.5 ? does that mean the vote doesnt pass? cause when you add > them up you get a -0.5 > > can i vote? > - > 0.333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 > > -igor > > > On 12/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > From: > > > > +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okey with this.' > > -0: 'I won't get in the way, but I'd rather we didn't do this.' > > -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational > > justification for my feelings.' > > ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's do it!' > > -0.9: 'I really don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the way > > if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.' > > +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the > > skills necessary to help out.' > > > > [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto > > > > > > On 12/7/06, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > wtf is a 0.5 vote? can i vote 0.7 for and 0.3 against? my brain cant do > > > floating point math! > > > > > > /me kicks martijn in the ball > > > > > > -igor > > > > > > > > > On 12/7/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > A lot of people have asked in the past for a component interface and > > > > we said no (until OSGi came with a good reason, and even then). Just > > > > only asking for opening up is not a good reason to do so IMO. > > > > > > > > A good reason I can come up with for removing final from the > > > > onComponentTag method is to reduce the need for AttributeModifiers. > > > > These use up memory just as components, and therefore can increase > > > > memory load. I have done so in a couple of places in our application, > > > > reducing the memory footprint considerably. However, these were done > > > > on Panels and WebMarkupContainers, which already don't have a final on > > > > onComponentTag. > > > > > > > > My point here is: removing final from onComponentTag may give better > > > > scalability, and in some cases even be more convenient (if you already > > > > are subclassing the component). > > > > > > > > I have yet to encounter a case for removing final from onComponentBody > > > > on all (or any for that matter) components. In my opinion removing > > > > final from onCB gives too much opportunity for servlet style > > > > programming. > > > > > > > > [-0.5] yes, make all onComponentTag and onComponentTagBody methods of > > > > the standard components in core non-final. This does leave the door > > > > open for specific components to not adhere to that - I'm not proposing > > > > a new standard - but if this wins we would remove final for most of em > > > > > > > > [0.5] no, leave the code as it is now > > > > > > > > Martijn > > > > > > > > -- > > > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket > > ">Vote</a> > > > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket > > > > ">Wicket</a> > > > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/";>Best Stuff in > > > > the World!</a> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket ">Vote</a> > > for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket > > ">Wicket</a> > > at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/";>Best Stuff in > > the World!</a> > > > > -- <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket";>Vote</a> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket ">Wicket</a> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/";>Best Stuff in the World!</a>
