On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:14 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > > If it's not done properly, why bother with a VOTE at all? >
I'm with Sebb here. Yes, our release process is a PITA, but what Sebb is asking for is what I expect as well. If you want me to evaluate a RC and VOTE, please make my life and that of all the other reviewers, easier, not harder. Sometimes, I download the src zip and build, sometimes, I checkout the tag... FWIW, it should take a few minutes to transfer a site. Zip it, transfer it, unzip it. One file at a time is asking for problems IMO. Or are you saying that it takes hours to transfer even as a Zip? Gary > > On 19 December 2014 at 00:51, Emmanuel Bourg <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le 19/12/2014 01:08, sebb a écrit : > > > >> The VOTE email should include all the information needed to validate a > release. > > > > You are right but this is exactly the kind of hassle that makes release > > management tedious and discourages people from publishing releases. At > > some point a balance has to be found between the expectations, and I > > think publishing new releases is more important than posting a VOTE mail > > with an encyclopedic precision. > > > > IMHO Luc provided enough information to review the release properly. > > > > Emmanuel Bourg > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com Home: http://garygregory.com/ Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
