--- Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> If the active committers to Validator are happy with the release having
> happened, I'm +1 to keeping the release as is.
> 
> Yes it didn't obey the rules [good catch Martin], but unless there's an
> active reason why the release is bad, I think the community would be
> better served by letting the release remain and ensuring that the next
> release follows the Commons rules.

It did obey the httpd style release rules.  I don't think all commons
components have to follow one release style.  Maybe I just missed the
documentation on this though.

> 
> Unless an active Validator committer has complaint with the release
> itself, in which case it should be withdrawn and the comaplaint(s) dealt
> with.

I'm active on validator and I have no problem with the release. 
Personally, I prefer the commons release style over the httpd rules but
Rob volunteered his time to cut the release and it shouldn't get bogged
down by bureaucracy.  Cutting a release is time consuming as it is.

David

> 
> Hen
> 
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> > Sorry. Then for now we should withdraw this release,
> > do the vote(s) then rerelease ? I'll remove the release
> > for now until there is some guidance.
> >
> > This is also an issue for Struts 1.2.1 which also intends
> > to use this same set of rules ?
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Martin Cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 06:27 PM
> > > To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
> > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Commons-Validator 1.1.1 released
> > >
> > > This release raises some questions, since it follows (?) two sets of
> > > conflicting guidelines on how releases should be done.
> > >
> > > * The Commons guidelines call for a Release Plan to be voted on
> first, and
> > > a Release Candidate to be voted upon subsequent to that, and prior
> to the
> > > release itself. Jakarta also requires a vote prior to a release
> being made
> > > available.
> > >
> > > * The HTTPD guidelines appear to require no votes prior to the
> release
> > > being made available as an alpha version.
> > >
> > > Unless I am mistaken, there were no votes on release manager,
> release plan
> > > or release prior to this announcement, all of which are currently
> required
> > > by Jakarta and/or Jakarta Commons.
> > >
> > > While I understand that using the HTTPD release process might have
> its
> > > advantages, this would require a change to Jakarta and/or Commons
> rules,
> > > which is something that would have to be taken up by the PMC. In the
> > > meantime, I believe we need to use the rules that are currently in
> place.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Martin Cooper
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Robert Leland wrote:
> > >
> > > > Commons Validator 1.1.1 is now available for testing.
> > > >
> > > > Please refer to
> http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/validator/tasks.html
> > > > that details the changes that have taken place since the 1.1.0
> release.
> > > >
> > > > Downloads:
> > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/~rleland/ValidatorAlpha/1.1.1
> > > >
> > > > Just a reminder :
> > > > The release process is following the same general procedures
> established
> > > > for the Apache HTTPD project
> <http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html>
> > > > and Jakarta Commons products
> > > > <http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/releases/>, and utilize the
> HTTPD
> > > > numbering scheme.
> > > >
> > > > The release will initially be given an Alpha status and made
> available
> > > > through the Release Manager's home directory. Pursuant to a
> Majority
> > > > Vote on the /commons-dev/ Mailing List, the release may be moved
> to the
> > > > public release directory. The vote may also serve to reclassify
> the
> > > > release to be of *Beta* or *General Availability* (GA) quality, as
> > > > defined by the Apache HTTPD project. Subsequent votes may
> reclassify the
> > > > release, either to promote it or to demote it, as need be.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to