Result: New JDK8 Committer: Oleg Pekhovskiy

[Artem Ananiev]

Yes, David has already pointed to that. According to OpenJDK Bylaws, 
only votes visible to all the alias members should be taken into 
account, so the number of "Yes" votes is really 6...

Thanks,

Artem

On 3/12/2012 5:01 PM, Dmeetry Degrave wrote:
> Artem, it seems not all votes have reached alias. If someone replied
> from @oracle.com and was subscribed with old @sun.com, such replies
> haven't passed to mail list.
>
> thanks,
> dmeetry
>
> On 03/13/2012 01:22 AM, Artem Ananiev wrote:
>>
>> On 3/12/2012 1:26 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> On 13/03/2012 3:48 AM, Artem Ananiev wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Voting for Oleg Pekhovskiy [1] is now closed.
>>>>
>>>> Yes: 9
>>>> Veto: 0
>>>> Abstain: 9
>>>
>>> I only see 6 emails with a Yes vote in the archive and no abstains.
>>
>> "Abstain" value is a copy-paste typo :(
>>
>> People who publicly voted "Yes": Alexander Zuev, Sergey Bylokhov, Kelly
>> O'Hair, Alexey Utkin, Anthony Petrov, Pavel Porvatov, Alexander
>> Potochkin, Dalibor Topic. One more person voted "Yes" privately, without
>> jdk8-dev in CC. So the right values should be:
>>
>> Yes: 8
>> Veto: 0
>> Abstain: 0
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Artem
>>
>>> Doesn't change the result but ...
>>>
>>> David
>>> -----
>>>
>>>> According to the Bylaws definition of Lazy Consensus, this is
>>>> sufficient to approve the nomination.
>>>>
>>>> Artem
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8-dev/2012-February/000821.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>