Bryan Pendleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> I plan to do this as soon as the fix for DERBY-3347 has been merged to >>> the 10.4 branch, and then call for a vote on the new RC. > > I'm not sure I understand why the availability of additional fixes > required the cancellation of the previous vote.
It probably doesn't. I just chose that subject because the 10.3 Feature Release Summary on http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbyTenThreeRelease, says "Sanity Testing and Voting (Cancelled - blocker DERBY-1963)". > It seems to me that there are always additional fixes on the horizon. > > I don't think we were voting on whether 10.4.1.1 was to be the > actual *release*; Ummm, I thought we were. Had it not been for DERBY-3347 I was going to put it on the mirrors and so on (provided it got PMC approval). > we were simply voting on whether it was an > acceptable release *candidate* for making available for advanced > users interested in helping us test the software prior to release. So you you considered 10.4.1.1 to be a BETA release candidate that, once approved through a vote would become a BETA release that users could try out? And that based on their feedback there would be a proper release candidate that, if approved, would turn into a proper release? That was not my plan. Sorry if I gave that impression. The current description of the release process only mentions one vote, and my understanding is that it determines if a release candidate can become a release. -- dt
