Re: Review-Priority for Project Repos

I don't know if this was the reasoning behind Cinder's system, but I know some people object to procedural -2 because it's a big hammer to essentially say "not right now". It overloads the meaning of the vote in a potentially confusing way that requires explanation every time it's used. At least I hope procedural -2's always include a comment.

This was exactly the reasoning. -2 is overloaded, but its primary meaning was/is "we do not want this code change". It just happens that it was also a convenient way to say that with "right now" at the end. The Review-Priority -1 is a clear way to say whether something is held because it can't be merged right now due to procedural or process reasons, versus something that we just don't want at all.