I should add that it would have been pretty easy to convince me to go for a -0 because those 2 missing files are really not that important.
But otoh, such things tend to get forgotten if they are not resolved immediately, and I think we all like to get BVAL out of the incubator as fast as possible. And a perfect first release is always a good start :) For the votes: most are majority votes, but in my experience 90% of the votes pass with only +1 (because no one likes to call a vote if something is obviously flowed). >From the 10% with some -1 votes, 95% of those cases are failures which slipped >through but are unisono agreed on should-get-fixed before the release - or it >could be made clear that the behaviour is not a problem. And only this very little rest (I've rarely seen such cases) there is a discussion because of different flavours and styles where people cannot find a compromise. But that's also not really a problem - if someone votes -1 and you think it's stupid, then simply tell your arguments ;) We are a community project, and discussion arguments are the most precious power we have :) txs and LieGrue, strub --- On Wed, 5/26/10, Kevan Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Kevan Miller <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Bean Validation 0.1-incubating Release Candidate > To: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 2:46 PM > > On May 26, 2010, at 5:07 AM, Carlos Vara wrote: > > >> > >> Usually there are good reasons if someone votes a > -1 on a release - and all > >> projects I know just suspend the vote until the > vetoing member either got > >> convinced to recall his veto or the problem got > resolved. > >> > > > > I didn't know this, seems reasonable taking into > account that after a -1 > > vote has been placed other votes don't really make > much sense. > > Agreed. Technically, release votes are simple majority > votes (with a requirement of 3 PMC votes). It is very good > practice to resolve any -1 issues on a release vote. > However, there are occasions where communities have decided > that it was acceptable. It would be highly unusual for an > Incubator project to try and release with any outstanding -1 > issues. > > --kevan
