On 22 October 2017 at 17:53, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> wrote: > Hmm, well, but that usually only happens if it is clear that the vote should > get cancelled.
Isn't that what I wrote? > LieGrue, > strub > >> Am 22.10.2017 um 15:29 schrieb sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: >> >> On 21 October 2017 at 18:27, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> wrote: >>>> Even though there is no >>>> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might >>>> postpone a release as well, even after +1s. >>> >>> >>> Yes indeed. Sometimes a single person discovers a problem during the voting >>> process and casts -1. >>> A -1 always should come with good arguments. >>> Usually that leads to the others (who already voted) review this argument. >>> And if it turns out to really be a problem which the others have simply >>> overlooked, then they often amend their vote to a -1 as well. >> >> Or the RM can just cancel the vote if it's obvious that the problem is >> sufficiently serious. >> I don't think there is any need for additional -1 votes in that case. >> >>> LieGrue, >>> strub >>> >>> >>>> Am 21.10.2017 um 19:15 schrieb Wade Chandler <wadechand...@apache.org>: >>>> >>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html >>>> >>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes >>>> >>>> It is technically both with nuances. Time and 3 binding +1s plus a majority >>>> +1s. The 72 hours is a participation enabler. The 3 bindings is the minimum >>>> required, but a majority -1s would be a big deal. Even though there is no >>>> veto vote on releases, if someone raised a valid issue, the group might >>>> postpone a release as well, even after +1s. >>>> >>>> Wade >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2017 08:55, "Geertjan Wielenga" >>>> <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Many thanks -- so, right now, Bertrand, John, and Mark have done binding >>>>> votes -- i.e., two of our mentors and the VP Incubator. >>>>> >>>>> How many binding votes are needed or is it simply a question of time, >>>>> i.e., >>>>> at the time that the vote expires, if there's no -1, and only +1 binding >>>>> votes, then the release of this specific repo that is one of the repose of >>>>> Apache NetBeans is approved? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Gj >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 IPMC binding >>>>>> >>>>>> LICENSE, NOTICE, rat, dependencies, signing, etc all looks good. >>>>>> >>>>>> However when building it from the distribution zip on my macbook with >>>>>> java8 144 I sometimes get test errors. >>>>>> All of them in knockout.js, but each time something different: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Configuring TestNG with: TestNG652Configurator >>>>>> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http. >>>>> server.NetworkListener >>>>>> start >>>>>> INFORMATION: Started listener bound to [0.0.0.0:18572] >>>>>> Oct 21, 2017 1:55:53 PM org.glassfish.grizzly.http.server.HttpServer >>>>> start >>>>>> INFORMATION: [HttpServer] Started. >>>>>> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 6.451 >>>>> sec >>>>>> <<< FAILURE! >>>>>> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(org. >>>>> netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) >>>>>> Time elapsed: 0.03 sec <<< FAILURE! >>>>>> java.lang.AssertionError: We got callback from 2nd child null expecting: >>>>>> null actual: Last >>>>>> at net.java.html.json.tests.Utils.assertEquals(Utils.java:217) >>>>>> at net.java.html.json.tests.KnockoutTest. >>>>>> displayContentOfComputedArrayOnComputedASubpair(KnockoutTest.java:622) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >>>>>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >>>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) >>>>>> at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx.run(KOFx.java:73) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Tests run: 78, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.772 >>>>> sec >>>>>> <<< FAILURE! >>>>>> rawObject(org.netbeans.html.ko4j.KOFx) Time elapsed: 0.067 sec <<< >>>>>> FAILURE! >>>>>> netscape.javascript.JSException: netscape.javascript.JSException: >>>>>> java.lang.NullPointerException >>>>>> at org.netbeans.html.ko4j.$JsCallbacks$.raw$org_netbeans_ >>>>>> html_ko4j_Knockout$setValue$ILjava_lang_Object_2($JsCallbacks$.java:156) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >>>>>> NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >>>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.misc.Trampoline.invoke(MethodUtil.java:71) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor1.invoke(Unknown Source) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke( >>>>>> DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) >>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) >>>>>> at sun.reflect.misc.MethodUtil.invoke(MethodUtil.java:275) >>>>>> at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.lambda$fwkInvokeWithContext$ >>>>>> 60(Utilities.java:94) >>>>>> at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) >>>>>> at com.sun.webkit.Utilities.fwkInvokeWithContext( >>>>>> Utilities.java:94) >>>>>> at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.callImpl(Native Method) >>>>>> at com.sun.webkit.dom.JSObject.call(JSObject.java:115) >>>>>> at org.netbeans.html.boot.fx.AbstractFXPresenter$JSFn. >>>>> invokeImpl( >>>>>> AbstractFXPresenter.java:418) >>>>>> >>>>>> Failed tests: >>>>>> KOFx.run:73 ยป JS netscape.javascript.JSException: >>>>>> java.lang.NullPointerExcepti... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Running the build for the forth time made it succeed. >>>>>> I'd say it's not a blocker for the release, but we might improve the test >>>>>> setup. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> txs for rolling the release! >>>>>> >>>>>> LieGrue, >>>>>> strub >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 21.10.2017 um 14:04 schrieb John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here's my +1 to release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:43 AM Bertrand Delacretaz < >>>>>>> bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Jaroslav Tulach >>>>>>>> <jaroslav.tul...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> ...I'd like to ask you to hold the Incubator >>>>>>>>> PMC vote to release:.. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here's my +1 repeated from the podling list for >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SHA1(incubating-netbeans-html4j-1.5.zip)= >>>>>>>> fd77975f1adbcbc4b926e1cfab6865f47db6df3c >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jaroslav's GPG key is included in >>>>>>>> https://people.apache.org/keys/group/netbeans.asc >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Bertrand >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> 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 >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
