On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:39 AM, Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >> On 24/02/2010 09:05, Henri Yandell wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Henri Yandell<flame...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Bill Barker<billwbar...@verizon.net> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>>> From: "jean-frederic clere"<jfcl...@gmail.com> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:48 PM >>>>> To:<dev@commons.apache.org> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Commons Daemon 1.0.2 based on RC2 >>>>> >>>>>> On 02/23/2010 09:02 AM, Mladen Turk wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Daemon RC2 fixes some minor distribution issues over the >>>>>>> previous RC1 proposal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> RC2 Release is here: >>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~mturk/daemon/ >>>>>>> Tag is here: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/daemon/tags/COMMONS_DAEMON_1_0_2_RC2/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If voted for a release the COMMONS_DAEMON_1_0_2_RC2 tag will >>>>>>> be copied to COMMONS_DAEMON_1_0_2 and released as such. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------- >>>>>>> [X] +1 I support this release >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ok, so we have three people listed as developers for this project >>>>> approving >>>>> the release, including the author of the three remaining disputed files. >>>>> Can >>>>> we get a couple more votes, to actually release this? >>>> >>>> Is the objection to the -1 that the files should never contain the AL >>>> header, or is the objection that it shouldn't be a release blocker? >>> >>> Scratch that - I see that the files have had headers added by Bill. >>> >>> Sebb - I don't think this is a release blocker. The three Makefiles >>> are pretty piddly, and it's fixed for a subsequent version. Wondering >>> if you can reconsider on your -1. >> >> It doesn't matter. Releases can not be vetoed. Period. >> >> At my count this release has three +1 votes and one -1 vote. That is >> sufficient for a release. It is up to the release manager to decide if the >> issues raised by the -1 vote are sufficient to stop the release or if they >> want to go ahead with the release. Unless I have completely misunderstood >> Mladen's views, he wants to go ahead with this and he now has the votes to >> do so. > > Fair enough. That is what http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > says, though I don't recall this list not working to consensus for a > release.
*sigh*... late. That sounds petulant :) I just meant that it's not been the style afaik up to now. No implication either way - we'll adapt. Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
