As far as I'm concerned, you can still vote on the existing thread. Please vote from a legal perspective rather than a technical one.
The timeframe is set to ensure people have the ability to vote - it isn't a requirement that it completes within a specific timeframe. thx. Upayavira On Mon, Oct 19, 2015, at 09:39 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote: > All, > > I still find the Wave project quite interesting and am more than happy to > help. I just haven’t really felt the pull of the community. If I > thought there we something specific I could do to help I would be more > than happy. I would like to see the release finally happen. Even if we > eventually move away it would be nice to have completed this process once > during the life of the project. > > If there is another vote I will participate. I will review the process > and functional status and provide a vote. > > So you can count me in. > > ~Michael > > > > > On 10/18/15, 4:56 AM, "Upayavira" <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > >Non-binding votes have a different value. If we had insufficient > >committer/PPMC votes but loads of quality (I.e not drive by) non-binding > >votes, it would suggest we have a different problem, and could look how > >to addresss that. > > > >Upayavira > > > >On Sat, Oct 17, 2015, at 09:33 PM, Zachary Yaro wrote: > >> I would have cast a vote, but I read non-binding votes were discouraged. > >> To clarify, what are the criteria for being able to cast a binding vote > >> for > >> this project? > >> > >> Zachary Yaro > >> > >> On 17 October 2015 at 21:48, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> > Thanks to Yuri and Jeremy for downloading and trying out this RC. > >> > > >> > Well, I set a "deadline" around the 17th October which has now well > >> > and truly passed. > >> > > >> > My vote on the matter was a +1 (though I realize that I failed to put > >> > this in my original email, so you are allowed to ignore this for > >> > failing to meet my own deadline). > >> > > >> > The result looks something like (including mine): > >> > +1: 3 (2 binding) > >> > +0: 0 > >> > -0: 0 > >> > -1: 0 > >> > > >> > Unfortunately we have had insufficient votes to meet the release > >> > requirement (minimum of 3 +1 binding votes, more + than -) [0]. > >> > Binding votes as decided by people in [1]. > >> > > >> > @Yuri/Jeremy: How do you feel now about us moving away from Apache, as > >> > this vote does seem to suggest that there is not enough interest from > >> > the currently defined committers to maintain this project here. > >> > > >> > I am not really sure why none of the other committers responded at all > >> > to the vote... > >> > > >> > Ali > >> > > >> > [0]: > >> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification > >> > [1]: https://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#wave > >> > > >> > On 14 October 2015 at 17:27, Jérémy Naegel <jeremy....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > +1 > >> > > > >> > > +Jérémy Naegel <http://google.com/+JérémyNaegel > >> > <http://google.com/+J%C3%A9r%C3%A9myNaegel>> > >> > > Public Information Officer > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Yuri Z <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> I did the following: > >> > >> - Checked signatures > >> > >> - Opened the binary and verified it works. > >> > >> - Opened the source and verified that it can be built and works. > >> > >> - Reviewed the changes for the rc 10. > >> > >> > >> > >> Ali - Thanks for making this RC! > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:59 AM Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > RC10 is now available for review. > >> > >> > Artefacts can be found here: > >> > >> > https://people.apache.org/~al/wave_rc/0.4-rc10/ > >> > >> > (Remember checksums are from 'gpg --print-md SHA512 $f > $f.sha') > >> > >> > > >> > >> > I have included both source and binary artefacts for convenience. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > The release version (if successful) will be 0.4.0-incubating > >> > >> > > >> > >> > This is taken from the branch 0.4.0-rc10 of the incubator-wave > >> > >> repository. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Notable changes since earlier initial release attempts include: > >> > >> > - Use of typesafe config > >> > >> > - Bumped versions of Jetty, GWT, etc. > >> > >> > - Assorted tweaks to build system > >> > >> > > >> > >> > A summary of useful information can be found in RELEASE-NOTES, and a > >> > >> > list of changes in CHANGES in the source artefacts. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Action Required: > >> > >> > Please go and test these packages (most importantly the source ones) > >> > >> > for any outstanding legal problems, or any runtime problems in a > >> > >> > 'standard' configuration. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > We are not looking for a perfect first release, as there is plenty > >> > >> > of > >> > >> > time to fix outstanding bugs in future releases, but we do want to > >> > >> > get > >> > >> > 0.4 out soon (at long last). > >> > >> > > >> > >> > This vote will close around 0000 GMT 17th October 2015. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > [ ] +1 Release it! > >> > >> > [ ] +0 Ok, but... > >> > >> > [ ] -0 Ok, but you really should fix... > >> > >> > [ ] -1 Definitely do not release this because... > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Thanks, > >> > >> > Ali > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >
