Makes sense to me. The voting document itself be updated I guess.
Regards, Alan On Feb 5, 2011, at 5:56 AM, Scott O'Bryan wrote: > Yeah I agree with this. At MyFaces we typically way the 72 hours, but > for security things or master pom updates which prevent a built, we > often adopt "lazy consensus" type rule and fudge the timeframe with > enough community votes. > > I think it's important to keep things flexible because, as much as we > would like everything to fit the same rules, some communities need to > be a bit more dynamic and we need to trust the project PMC's and > members to do what's best for the project and community. > > 72 hours is a good suggestion, but it shouldn't be mandatory. > > My .02.. > > Scott > > On Feb 4, 2011, at 11:49 PM, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 02/04/2011 10:52 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: >>> >>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html >>> >> >> Note the wording: "should". >> Sometimes 72 hours is just too long, especially >> for security related releases. In that (or any other >> special) case RM can call for a shorter, or even >> longer window. >> >> >> Regards >> -- >> ^TM >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
