Emmanuel Lecharny schrieb: > David Jencks wrote: >> >> On Sep 17, 2008, at 2:21 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: >> >>> Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot wrote: >>>> <snip/> >>>> I don't completely agree, I think we need a vote for any release we >>>> make to >>>> the Maven repository. >>>> >>> This would be overkilling, IMO. >> >> I think you should ask on legal discuss if you really want to do >> that. My understanding is that the legal foundation of the asf >> involves the strict principle that all releases need to be voted on by >> the pmc. You might possibly be able to argue that the TLP pom doesn't >> include any code or anything copyrightable so doesn't need a vote >> (although I think such arguments are exceedingly weak and the danger >> of releasing without a vote is far greater than the nuisance of a >> vote) but IIUC anything with code in it definitely requires a vote. > We usually don't release the TLP pom per se, it is only released if one > other part is released, so we _have_ a formal vote (usually :), for the > encapsulating project (apacheds, here).
Which IMO is in contradiction to your response when I launched a vote some days ago about releasing a TLP pom :-). And it's stated clearly in the dev doc you pointed me to that no vote is needed to release a TLP pom: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/NdY, chap. 'Corrective Actions to Properly Use the TLP POM', pt. 6: "No vote needed for TLP POM release for PMC members - just a notification to release with 4 hour grace period to accommodate the lack of using SNAPSHOT for this POM" > > What happened recently is just a catch up to fix some maven things in > the TLP pom. We will have to release it if we want to release shared of > apacheds, but until then, I still think it's unnecessary. >
