Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Traffic Server v2.1.4

+1 Built and tested on MacOS 10.6.4. On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote: > Hi all, > > I've prepared a new package for a v2.1.4 release. Please take a look at the > artifacts, check the STATUS/README/CHANGES files, and do builds and tests. > After finishing your examination of t

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Traffic Server v2.1.4

+1 Built and tested on EC2 {ubuntu lucid, ubuntu karmic}. On Nov 9, 2010, at 6:10 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote: > Hi all, > > I've prepared a new package for a v2.1.4 release. Please take a look at the > artifacts, check the STATUS/README/CHANGES files, and do builds and tests. > After finishing y

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Traffic Server v2.1.4

built and running for us. +1 On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Leif Hedstrom wrote: > Hi all, > > I've prepared a new package for a v2.1.4 release. Please take a look at the > artifacts, check the STATUS/README/CHANGES files, and do builds and tests. > After finishing your examination of the rele

[VOTE] Release Apache Traffic Server v2.1.4

Hi all, I've prepared a new package for a v2.1.4 release. Please take a look at the artifacts, check the STATUS/README/CHANGES files, and do builds and tests. After finishing your examination of the release candidate, please cast your ±/0 votes, I will call the vote on 11/12. The src tar-ball

Re: [VOTE] Bylaws proposal

On 11/09/2010 01:26 PM, Paul Querna wrote: I see little need for an additional "Bylaws". I think following the foundation guidelines are all that 90% of projects need for their day to day lives: So what do you all think? Should we shelve the byl

Re: [VOTE] Bylaws proposal

I see little need for an additional "Bylaws". I think following the foundation guidelines are all that 90% of projects need for their day to day lives: I think adding an additional bylaws about exceptional things are not needed. Don't build policie

Re: [VOTE] Bylaws proposal

On 11/09/2010 06:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: In general, a release can not be vetoed, but it is a gauge to whether the RM wants to continue or not. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html Cool, that makes sense. So lets leave this vote as lazy majority, as it is in the prop

Re: [VOTE] Bylaws proposal

In general, a release can not be vetoed, but it is a gauge to whether the RM wants to continue or not. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html On Nov 8, 2010, at 4:36 PM, John Plevyak wrote: > Folks still have to vote on whether or not it is ready. Typically a vote > against