On 07.04.2014 09:30, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On 7 April 2014 18:58, Ben Reser <b...@reser.org> wrote: >> Let's adopt Johan's suggestion from the other thread. >> >> Specifically, for alpha/beta releases (no change for release candidates or >> normal releases). Require at least 1 vote for each platform (Windows/Unix) >> and >> at least 3 votes total. >> >> For example. >> >> If the voting was like this: >> +3 Unix >> > Well, it's better than original suggestion. But I'm -0 on this > procedure change: the actual problems could be postponed to release > candidates.
Which "actual problems" are we talking about here? What problems would arise from this policy change for alpha/beta releases? Please note: strictly speaking, it is not really a change in policy, because we haven't really been producing alpha and beta releases until now. An alpha or beta release is still considered an Apache release, and therefore falls under the 3+1/no-1 rule. We have traditionally been more conservative with our releases and release candidates, and this proposal actually continues that tradition by proposing slightly stricter rules for alphas and betas. > Just for the records: I'm -1 on similar policy change for normal releases. Nobody is proposing this. -- Branko Čibej | Director of Subversion WANdisco // Non-Stop Data e. br...@wandisco.com
