On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Tomas Mraz <tmraz(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2012-02-09 at 04:24 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 02:14:53AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> > IMHO, FESCo needs to accept that sometimes they make a mistake (especially
> > if the vote was disputed to begin with) and revote. UsrMove should have been
> > unapproved, not only for F17, but forever.
>
> So, just to be clear, you're saying that even if usrmove had landed in
> an entirely perfect and complete form the day after F16 branched, it
> should still have been rejected?
You're talking about completely theoretical situation nobody is arguing
on.
Well Keven wrote "UsrMove should have been unapproved, not only for
F17, but forever." ... so he just oppose the feature per se not its
state.