I’ll also try and review tonight.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chief Architect
Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
Email: [email protected]
WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++





-----Original Message-----
From: Lewis John Mcgibbney <[email protected]>
Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 11:06 AM
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Discussion] How do we get more people involved signing off
on releases?

>Hi Tom,
>ACK this thread and ACK the RC as well.
>Will get around to answering both later.
>Ta
>
>On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 2:32 AM, Tom Barber <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> Hello folks
>>
>> As some of you will be aware there has been a release VOTE sat in the
>>wild
>> with no votes since Feb 11th, now I might have picked a bad time to
>>submit
>> the vote but that's by the by, I have a question off of the back of
>>this.
>>
>> When a release goes to VOTE how do we get more people involved?
>>
>> There are 43 people on the PMC who can all check the release artefacts
>>and
>> VOTE on whether it be released or not, yet the majority of the releases
>> have the same 4 or 5 people voting. So, are most of the PMC emeritus?
>>Is it
>> a lack of clarity on what is involved in voting, or something completely
>> different?
>>
>> Understandably the platform doesn't see a great deal of development
>> activity because it does what it says on the tin, but as its an ASF
>>project
>> it does need a cohesive PMC to make sure build and issues get resolved
>> properly, so what can we do to improve it?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Tom
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>*Lewis*

Reply via email to