Hey Bertrand,
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 10:54 AM Bertrand Delacretaz <
bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote:
> Ok, if it's specific about non-ASF releases it should be named like that
> IMO.
>
There have been discussions about keeping ASF release votes inside the
podlings lists. If one of those prop
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 10:18 AM Myrle Krantz wrote:
> ...What's different than now is that rather than pretending non-ASF releases
> don't exist, we are offering podlings the opportunity to use them to learn
> and prepare for ASF releases
Ok, if it's specific about non-ASF releases it should
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 10:09 AM Lars Francke
wrote:
> Just one question: Where/how do you plan on documenting this?
>
I don't know yet: I will look for an appropriate place and ask for
feedback. Do you have a good idea?
Best,
Myrle
Hey Betrand! : o)
I totally agree that we don't need more rules. Here's the original discuss
thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3c4c8473f6733ad243b748398b25f3ef614aab32aa264216eeaa0695@
Specifically:
"It's not a rule. It's an offering of an additional service + an
incremental reductio
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- Original --
> > From: "justin";
> > Date: Wed, Mar 13, 2019 04:41 PM
> > To: "general";
> >
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] introduce "[DISCUSS]" threads for p
Hi Myrle,
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 6:27 PM Myrle Krantz wrote:
> ..."Podlings should be able to request feedback by starting a "[DISCUSS]"
> thread or a "[VOTE]" thread
Sorry that I didn't catch this at the discussion stage, but what is
new in this proposal compared to now?
Anyone can start
kin
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- Original ------
> From: "justin";
> Date: Wed, Mar 13, 2019 04:41 PM
> To: "general";
>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] introduce "[DISCUSS]" threads for podling releases
&
lease.??
+1 (binding) from me. Make sense.
--
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin
Twitter, wusheng1108
-- Original --
From: "justin";
Date: Wed, Mar 13, 2019 04:41 PM
To: "general";
Subject: Re:
Hi,
+1 (binding)
> Amendment:
> "A non-ASF release
> * May or may not be staged on ASF infrastructure for the purposes of a
> vote, but it is distributed via non-ASF infrastructure, AND
> * Is either not linked from a podling's website, or is linked but clearly
> marked as a non-ASF release.”
So
That seems fixable
I hereby amend the proposal with the following definition of "non-ASF
release". If this definition is not sufficient, consider accepting the
term as currently undefined and start a discussion to create a definition
without blocking this vote:
Amendment:
"A non-ASF release
* Ma
Hi,
+1 to the idea in general, but +0 to it in its current form.
> "Podlings should be able to request feedback by starting a "[DISCUSS]"
> thread or a "[VOTE]" thread. The podling can decide whether they prefer
> [DISCUSS] or [VOTE], but only a release which passes a vote by members of
> the IP
11 matches
Mail list logo
