Well what is the reason people don't vote? I just think we need to make it
easier to actually test the releases.
My system is setup to vote on plugins that I use. Obviously I don't vote on
plugins I don't use.
<profile>
<id>stage</id>
<activation>
<property>
<name>stage</name>
</property>
</activation>
<repositories>
<repository>
<id>staging</id>
<name>Maven Staging</name>
<url>
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-${stage}/</url>
</repository>
</repositories>
<pluginRepositories>
<pluginRepository>
<id>staging-plugin</id>
<name>Maven Staging</name>
<url>
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-${stage}/</url>
</pluginRepository>
</pluginRepositories>
</profile>
./mvn
A maven release is another story. What about
Why I don't vote on some release: because it requires setup.
I'm setup to test new plugins. Shared components is different.
Sounds like you'll be stirring up blocking votes.
If you want more votes in general then I suggest documentation to make it
easier to vote.
For instance, I know how to test a plugin, but not a shared component.
I imagine there actually a few ways to set up my system to make this easier.
On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 12:02, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> Lazy consensus?
>
> Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
> And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes :D
>
> T
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:58 AM Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Howdy Romain,
> > >
> > > So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member
> > of
> > > PMC.
> > > The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> > > Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting
> guidelines
> > > will pass.
> > >
> >
> > To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
> > And more positive votes than negative
> >
> > How vote can pass if nobody votes?
> >
> >
> > > Thanks
> > > T
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> > > would
> > > > be rather negative).
> > > > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is
> totally
> > > > anti-community and disrespectful." is accurate, less than an off day
> > > > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> > > >
> > > > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month,
> will
> > > > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects
> > and
> > > > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend
> to
> > > > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not
> > that
> > > > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> > > always
> > > > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> > > >
> > > > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote
> on
> > > > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> > > sense
> > > > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> > > (thinking
> > > > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> > > >
> > > > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad,
> and
> > > ask
> > > > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more
> included
> > or
> > > > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> > > ignore
> > > > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
> > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák <csta...@apache.org> a
> > > écrit
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > Howdy,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in
> line
> > > > with
> > > > > ASF guidelines):
> > > > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote
> open
> > > for
> > > > at
> > > > > least 30 days, or more".
> > > > >
> > > > > Reasoning:
> > > > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> > > available
> > > > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the
> > "doorstep"
> > > > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies
> > and
> > > > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > > > That's
> > > > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt).
> We
> > > must
> > > > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters
> be
> > > > able
> > > > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A
> MUST.
> > > And
> > > > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1
> > > > > [ ] +0
> > > > > [ ] -1
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
