On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Noel J. Bergman <n...@devtech.com> wrote: >> I was under the impression that *any* mentor is an IPMC member, has a >> binding +1 vote for releases and could therefore approve of releases >> without having to go through general@ > > The issue is allowing proper oversight, and we've felt that it was important > to give the PMC as a whole the opportunity to vet the release package(s). > Given the frequency with which we have found issues, that seems warranted. > Hence ... > >> > Therefore, should a Podling decide it wishes to perform a release, the > Podling >> > SHALL hold a vote on the Podling's public -dev list. At least three +1 > votes >> > are required (see the Apache Voting Process page). If the majority of > all votes >> > is positive, then the Podling SHALL send a summary of that vote to the >> > Incubator's general list and formally request the Incubator PMC approve > such a >> > release. >
As long as general@ is included i don't see that any oversight is lost, or that requiring mentors to vote twice has any benefits. So continuing with the reasonably flexible approaches that are being used still seems ok to me. ...ant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
