brian 98/05/03 19:58:03
Modified: . STATUS
Log:
The guidelines have been approved - the devsite docs have been changed
to reflect this. Is there anywhere else we can/should note this?
Revision Changes Path
1.360 +0 -30 apache-1.3/STATUS
Index: STATUS
===================================================================
RCS file: /export/home/cvs/apache-1.3/STATUS,v
retrieving revision 1.359
retrieving revision 1.360
diff -u -r1.359 -r1.360
--- STATUS 1998/05/04 02:49:50 1.359
+++ STATUS 1998/05/04 02:58:02 1.360
@@ -9,36 +9,6 @@
2.0 : In pre-alpha development, see apache-2.0 repository
-Guidelines:
-
- o For the past few months we have been working on a commit-then-review
- basis. It is now time to decide whether or not we want to work
- under the guidelines in <http://dev.apache.org/guidelines.html>
- or not, and if not, what changes are needed to make it right.
-
- Approve guidelines as written:
- +1: Paul, Jim, Martin, Ralf, Randy, Brian, Ken
- +0:
- -1:
-
- Notes:
- - Ken: 'lazy consensus' needs to be defined.
- - Ralf: At least the following points should be added:
- 1. A statement that really everyone has the equal right to veto
- in general and that only the one can rescind a veto who has
- done it originally.
- 2. The statements that although a veto can be done at any point
- if it gets done more then approximately two weeks after some
- stuff already went in or was changed, the guy who vetoes
- really _HAS_ to provide a reasonable alternative solution
- idea _AND_ at least someone (not really the guy who vetoes)
- who wants to volunteer for this alternative solution. Or
- the veto will not make much sense IMHO at this stage and
- always just creates flamewars! I think only this way it's
- fair.
-
-Plan:
-
Showstoppers:
Available Patches:
Modified: . STATUS
Log:
The guidelines have been approved - the devsite docs have been changed
to reflect this. Is there anywhere else we can/should note this?
Revision Changes Path
1.360 +0 -30 apache-1.3/STATUS
Index: STATUS
===================================================================
RCS file: /export/home/cvs/apache-1.3/STATUS,v
retrieving revision 1.359
retrieving revision 1.360
diff -u -r1.359 -r1.360
--- STATUS 1998/05/04 02:49:50 1.359
+++ STATUS 1998/05/04 02:58:02 1.360
@@ -9,36 +9,6 @@
2.0 : In pre-alpha development, see apache-2.0 repository
-Guidelines:
-
- o For the past few months we have been working on a commit-then-review
- basis. It is now time to decide whether or not we want to work
- under the guidelines in <http://dev.apache.org/guidelines.html>
- or not, and if not, what changes are needed to make it right.
-
- Approve guidelines as written:
- +1: Paul, Jim, Martin, Ralf, Randy, Brian, Ken
- +0:
- -1:
-
- Notes:
- - Ken: 'lazy consensus' needs to be defined.
- - Ralf: At least the following points should be added:
- 1. A statement that really everyone has the equal right to veto
- in general and that only the one can rescind a veto who has
- done it originally.
- 2. The statements that although a veto can be done at any point
- if it gets done more then approximately two weeks after some
- stuff already went in or was changed, the guy who vetoes
- really _HAS_ to provide a reasonable alternative solution
- idea _AND_ at least someone (not really the guy who vetoes)
- who wants to volunteer for this alternative solution. Or
- the veto will not make much sense IMHO at this stage and
- always just creates flamewars! I think only this way it's
- fair.
-
-Plan:
-
Showstoppers:
Available Patches: