PR is enough. People can vote with their reviews.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > For this kind of changes do we need a vote ? or is it enough a PR against > the release guide ? > > Enrico > > 2017-11-30 12:23 GMT+01:00 Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org>: > >> I like the idea of sending the sha in the vote. The tag changes, so >> it's not possible to go back and see what was voted on after release. >> We should provide both the sha and the tag. >> >> -Ivan >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > yes. I was thinking of doing the flink way to have an official image repo >> > at docker hub. >> > >> > - Sijie >> > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Jia Zhai <zhaiji...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> I remember that, Do you mean we do bookkeeper docker following zookeeper >> >> and flink's way? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I think it is better to change the docker image process, leaving tag >> >> > untouched. I have raised the discussion about official docker image >> ago. >> >> > That was for addressing the issues I have seen in docker image >> >> generation. >> >> > I think we should revisit docker release process rather than tag. >> >> > >> >> > On Nov 29, 2017 1:29 PM, "Enrico Olivelli" <eolive...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Hi, >> >> > > During the release process we are voting a 'tag' but because of >> docker >> >> > > builder requirements we have to drop that voted tag and create a new >> >> one. >> >> > > I think that we can improve this process by writing explicitly the >> >> commit >> >> > > sha in the vote email so that it is clear what PMC and other >> >> > > committers/contributors are voting and they are sure that this will >> not >> >> > be >> >> > > altered in the future. >> >> > > I saw this in Apache Calcite vote process for instance. >> >> > > We can also make an improvement to write the git sha on manifests >> as we >> >> > are >> >> > > voting on binaries (I think that the vote is really on source, not >> on >> >> > > binaries) >> >> > > >> >> > > This is just an idea, maybe I misunderstand the process. But in this >> >> case >> >> > > it would be better not to cite the tag in the email and let people >> vote >> >> > > only on the staged source artifacts and/or make it clearer in the >> email >> >> > > what exactly we are going to release (binaries, sources, git sha, >> git >> >> > > tag...) >> >> > > >> >> > > I am not a lawyer I just want to understand what I am doing and >> improve >> >> > > things. >> >> > > >> >> > > Enrico >> >> > > -- >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > -- Enrico Olivelli >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >>
