On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 3:05 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
Exactly, you're just confirming what I wrote above.
A "vote being rigged" means that either the people who should be allowed to
vote
couldn't, or that people who are not allowed to vote did, or that voters were
tricked or forced to vote differently, or that votes were miscounted.
What's being alleged is that many members were tricked into changing
their vote by using the false narrative about _FORTIFY_SOURCE proposal
getting an unfair pass despite performance concerns (which *I*
hypothesized months ago and I later dispelled, in the end even quoting
benchmark results for it) and creating the impression that the
toolchain team is being duplicitous about the performance question.
Further trickery involved rushing the vote, claiming that it had to be
done soon to meet the mass rebuild deadline; too bad if those who had
strong objections earlier weren't around to put their comments on
record.
In that context the vote could in fact be considered rigged. If the
voting members could come out and clarify exactly why they changed
their vote, it would make things a lot clearer.
Sid