Re: Subject: CFV: New JDK 10 Committer: Erik Österlund

[Mario Torre]

2017-06-22 18:44 GMT+02:00 Daniel D. Daugherty <daniel.daugherty at oracle.com>:
> Point of order:
>
> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote
>
> The valid votes are "Yes", "Veto" or "Abstain" for this kind of vote.
> There is no specification for a "No" vote.

You are totally right, I was convinced we had a No vote option too,
but of course that's not the case. Nevertheless, what has been said is still
valid, the two veto seem to be cast just as a matter of principle, and
I don't see a strong argument supporting either one.

Cheers,
Mario
-- 
pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF
Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA  FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF

Java Champion - Blog: http://neugens.wordpress.com - Twitter: @neugens
Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/
OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/

Please, support open standards:
http://endsoftpatents.org/