Am 14.09.13 10:26, schrieb Ali Lown: >>> Also, don't assume you need to be a committer to vote. >> >> I thought I had to be. So can any member of the community vote? How much >> do I need to know about the code to submit a vote? For instance, I do not >> know much about how federation works behind-the-scenes, but I can give my >> opinion on the UX... >> > > It is slightly more subtle than that. Whilst the voting documentation > states that only committers/PMC can vote - it really means that they have > binding votes (so if we had lots of +1 from the community, but a PMC voted > -1, their vote would 'override' the community votes). > > However having lots of community votes is a good sign to the incubator - > since it shows that the project's community is active - and it is even > plausible that the community might find things that we don't (due to trying > the release in lots of different ways). > > If you can only review part, that is still fine. Place your vote and simply > state that you were only able to review the UX. >
Ali all said it very well. I would like to add a few personal experiences: - at log4j 2 i have only little knowledge about the actual codebase. I look at formalities, like license, headers, reports, signatures, how do the packages look. I also run unit tests. Finally i vote and tell people what i have done. - at Struts the codebase is huge. I haven't learned all bout it, because it's a lot work. But I know a few places and I read all commit notifications to stay on top. This way I am already pretty sure what happened and what not and if can accept it. I vote with that knowledge in mind and with doing formalities. - at Wave i definitely have no clue on what you folks are doing here (technical wise) :-). But I vote after I checked what I could. Formalities. Healthy communities are healthy because not only committers/pmc members vote. Just say what you have done and why you believe its a +1/-1. Then everything is fine. As a project we cannot prevent to roll out bugs. Every project has them. A vote is not necessary here to prevent technical issues. In first it's there to prevent we are delivering legal issues to our users. At second of course it would be good if we would all agree to the code base. But if there are codewise issues, they should have been noticed long before the notice. Cheers Christian > Does this clarify it a bit? (I agree that perhaps I hadn't been clear in > the past) > > Ali >
