Hi, > And then, if your answer is yes, as a release manager, I would request a > couple of things.
And in return I also like to request a few things: 1) The RM shouldn't assume everyone can do this as a full time job, reviewing release properly is difficult and sometime the issues are not easy to diagnose or suggest a fix for. Given the time I've had recently I can choose between trying to fix a few things or reviewing and voting. 2) A slower release candidate cycle would help, IMO you'll get more reviews, more testing and less release candidates overall. 3) Try to have one vote open at once rather than four. We need to reduce dependancies between projects where we can. The whole installer XML living in the project is becoming an issue here, in particular as it doesn't fit into the normal Apache source testing process. 4) Try to get other committers and users involved a bit more (and less issues with releases). I may of missed it but I didn't see an email to the user mailing list about these releases, more people that test == more issues found earlier on == less release candidates . And we may pick up a few potential committers along the way. I do see a few people helping out on this release which is encouraging - thanks for that. 5) Even if this is an issue in a RC please continue to test it - you may find an issue and save another release cycle. > A goal here should be to make releases "easy" (without violating policy, > of course). Otherwise it discourages others from volunteering to be an > RM. Being an RM totally burned out Justin. Actually no I just had other commitments plus I've been travelling / living out of a suitcase for 7 weeks / had limited internet access and given the length of time a typical release cycle goes for I was unable to commit to doing one. But seriously someone else needs to take a turn to do it, we need to spread the knowledge/process about a bit. > I also find it interesting that the guidance discouraged > including copyright, but at least folks can google for it. In particular a few incubating projects I've seen include copyright in LICENSE have passed votes. One came up for review today: https://github.com/apache/incubator-samza/blob/master/LICENSE The only consistency is inconstancy it seems. IMO The minimum requirements are not always what we need to aim for, sometime a little more information is actually helpful. We can always remove it later it it's deemed unnecessary. Justin
