Good catch, thanks for clarifying. On Tuesday, November 3, 2015, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> I’d like to clarify one thing. I believe that the licensing issue [1] was > fixed in release 1.1-incubating. > > Issues were raised during the 1.1 release vote, and the vote may have had > some procedural problems, and release 1.0 had the aforementioned problem, > but release 1.1 is sound. > > Julian > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KYLIN-999 > > > On Nov 3, 2015, at 2:38 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > Sure, to reiterate comments made in other threads. > > > > The issue started with a missing SGA. The SGA missing was problematic > for > > a few reasons: > > > > - The discussion thread was started without all required pre-steps > resolved. > > - The vote thread was started before the SGA was submitted to the > secretary. > > > > In the meanwhile, a release vote was started for Kylin where supposedly > > previously fixed licensing issues were found to not be resolved. In that > > case, it was noted that the issue was raised before, the JIRA marked as > > resolved, however the issue wasn't actually resolved. From there, it > seems > > that pressure was put on the IPMC member who had voted -1 to change his > > vote. From my point of view, a graduating podling shouldn't have > licensing > > issues in releases, due to the risks that it raises. It seems odd to me > > that two major licensing problems came up so quickly for this one > podling. > > > > At this point, licensing issues to me do block the graduation of Kylin. > It > > can be resolved with a new release vote that fixes the licensing issue > and > > I'll happy vote +1 if all licensing problems are resolved. I would > > encourage the mentors to closely compare Kylin to the recently proposed > > maturity model and see if there are any gaps. > > > > John > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 2:27 PM Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com > <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 5:06 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> At this point, I'd request that my vote remain listed as -1 on the > board > >>> resolution. > >> > >> A -1 on a graduation resolution is significant. While a -1 on a release > >> VOTE > >> does not block the release, a -1 on a VOTE like graduation, entry into > the > >> incubator, policy change, etc, ordinarily blocks progress. > >> > >> We handle things this way at Apache because consensus decision keeps > >> communities together. When issues are decided by majority rule, the > >> minority's opinions can be disregarded -- and the losing faction ends up > >> isolated. In contrast, when issues are decided by consensus, the > majority > >> has > >> to go the extra mile to consider the opinions of the minority and > possibly > >> adjust their proposals. > >> > >> So it would be helpful if you would please clarify whether you intend to > >> block > >> Kylin's graduation this month. If not, please consider changing your > >> position > >> to -0 on graduation. On the other hand, if you do intend to block > >> graduation, > >> please indicate what could persuade you to change your position. > >> > >> Marvin Humphrey > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > <javascript:;> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > <javascript:;> > >> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > <javascript:;> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > <javascript:;> > >
