Is the release still stuck due to the issue the general member is having? On 06/11/2015 4:13 AM, "Upayavira" <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
> Ahh, got it. What you meant was: > 6 committer votes > 1 mentor vote > 4 non-binding > > I took it to mean 6 votes total, of which 1 mentor and 4 non-bonding. > > Clarity shines forth, thank you. > > Are you now in a position to forward this to general@incubator? > > Thx > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015, at 05:10 PM, Ali Lown wrote: > > Upayavira, > > > > Am I overlooking something? > > > > I definitely wrote 6 committer votes (+1 mentor vote) in the email > > dated 3rd November. > > > > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-wave-dev/201511.mbox/%3CCABRGrVenajwQPBw98Zy99UqrMNNQMJ-X5tGcWWAMR3xNX%2Bnu7w%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > Ali > > > > On 3 November 2015 at 19:46, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > Congrats Ali, and good luck with your future plans! > > > > > > Can I ask you to check those tallies? I'm sure there are more > > > committer/PPMC member votes than two. > > > > > > Upayavira > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2015, at 03:22 PM, Ali Lown wrote: > > >> Hi all, > > >> > > >> Thanks for taking part in verifying this release candidate, it is > > >> great to finally be able to take a potential release to the others in > > >> the incubator! > > >> (I apologize for not following up sooner, I have finally graduated > > >> from Uni, so am now sorting out what comes next...) > > >> > > >> These results supersede the email I sent dated 18th October, with the > > >> results now looking like: > > >> > > >> +1: 6 (+1 mentor, +4 non-binding) > > >> +0: 0 > > >> -0: 0 > > >> -1: 0 > > >> > > >> Ali > > >> > > >> On 18 October 2015 at 02:48, 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 > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> >
