Can someone show me where in the bylaws this dreaded and apparently
mandatory 72+ hour window is?
When last I looked, it was the preferred thing to do in most
circumstances, it was not _MANDATED BY LAW_.
If this issue is as serious as you say it is, fix the minor nits, call a
speedy new vote, get your 3x+1, get it shipped.
Just don't make it a habit.
With regards,
Daniel.
On 2015-07-16 19:34, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
Am 16.07.2015 18:49, schrieb Roman Shaposhnik:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 1:47 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny
<elecha...@gmail.com> wrote:
Le 16/07/15 10:41, Justin Mclean a écrit :
Hi,
This vote passes with 4 binding "+1" votes, no "0" notes, and 2 "-1"
binding votes.
If you read carefully I think you find there were 3 -1 votes on the
binary releases.
True. I -1 the binary release. Interesting case : should we release if
we have as many -1 than +1 ?
Personally, I'm disappointed in the podling for not taking
care of feedback that seems really easy to take care of.
but not in time, because the apache process is too slow. What so you
prefer? A unfixed zero-day vulnerability reported against an apache
project, or a podling release which is not 100% according to strict
apache views. We are not a TLP yet after all.
And this release is a special case.
That security fix is the only reason why we did want release ASAP. We
own it to the community to be able to react to such things fast. And I
really would not like to explain to our users that we could not do a
release, because of a minor issue. If the apache process would not be
so slow, we would of course have made it different. But waiting
another 6 days, while some will be in holidays already, would have
been a problem.
bye blackdrag
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
