[RFC] tweak to voting rules

[Kent Gibson]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Kent Gibson wrote:
>>>
>>> That isn't a slight change - that is a complete redefinition of
>>> -1.
>
> -1 currently means "I don't want this to go in".  This changes it
> to "I don't want this to go in because the implementation is
> lacking".
>
I stand corrected - having dug up Martin's original definition -
"really don't want it in current form".
But I always interpret -1 as being more along the lines of "I'd switch
to git before I'd merge this".

> If you look at the vetoed requests, only two of them were rejected
> on the grounds that they were bad ideas.  Most of the rejections
> were due to implementation issues or because an email was
> incorrectly flagged as a merge request.
That maybe ok for -1, but how about all the +1s out there?
>
>
> I think we can easily hit diminishing returns by trying to map
> every opinion directly to a vote.
>
Agreed (as per my response to fullermd).
But it's always good to keep your options open.

Cheers,
Kent.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFbusvgoxTFTi1P8QRAm8xAJ4qyu6WpEc/RKYUedM46dK/RTeK0wCgtoPO
gWlzwsi8I3ODXr3U1ef8K2U=
=xWcF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----