Bug and nudge on general@incubator. Upayavira
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015, at 04:40 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote: > Is there anything we can do to help with that? > > > > > On 11/14/15, 6:07 AM, "Ali Lown" <a.lo...@gmail.com on behalf of > a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > > >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 > >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >> >>> > >>> >
