I am trying to get enough votes from IPMC, we need 3 but only have 2 currently (Justin, Christian).
Ali On 14 November 2015 at 00:25, Evan Hughes <ehu...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 >> > >> >>> > >> > >> >>> >>
