None of the links you provided describe anything to do with how a progression towards a release should work. It only described the release process itself. Nor do they describe how discussions should work. (Not should they.)
I’m not sure what these “several bits” that you refer to are. The one thing you mention (i.e. trying to have a single thread) is not a deviation from anything that I could see being that DISCUSS threads are not covered in the links you provided at all. I’m willing to accept that you might not understand what others are trying to say. It would be most productive if you would ask for clarification on things that don’t make sense to you rather than assuming we are somehow deviating from some norm. Thanks, Harbs On Dec 5, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > Hi, > >> Could you please show us where this “standard release process” is >> documented, and explain how we are somehow deferring from this “standard”? > > The process is described here [1] which references [2] and best practise > described here [3] and there is a work in progress with clearer MUSTs and > SHOULDs in it. (I was unable to find the link) > > In short the normal process is to have one or more RCs each tagged in version > control and placed on dist.apache.org along with a VOTE and a DISCUSS thread > for each RC. The RM keeps making release candidates and putting them up for > vote and discussion to the PMC until one gets the required 3 +1 binding votes > (and more +1 than -1 votes). The RC is then moved to the release area and the > release announced. > > Several bits of the noRC/lessRC (as described) deviate from this standard > process, most of the deviations are minor (ie single discuss thread for all > RCs), testing a nightly rather than the RC itself, but others are not ie the > apparent need to build consensus before making a RC and calling for a vote. > The later may be a misunderstanding of the then undocumented noRC process on > my part, but that's what happened with the TourDeFlex release. > > With few PMC members voting a single -1 or indication that that how someone > will vote can basically acts as a veto. > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html > 2. http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > 3. http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html >
