On 29 November 2011 16:26, Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:14 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This specifically says that a majority is NOT required. >> This does seem odd. > > This does mean that a release (for example due to a security issue) > cannot be held back by any entity or block of committers.
OK, that makes sense - but why is in not documented? It would make the rules much easier to understand if such requirements were explicitly documented. AFAICT, the underlying requirements for most of the ASF rules are rarely made explicit. This makes them harder to understand, especially in edge cases. It also makes them harder to amend (even just a clarification), because in general it's not possible to verify if the proposed update still meets the requirements. > Martijn > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
