So much for a quick answer. ;-) I am not alone in my thinking. Obviously someone else feels the same way, the author of that document. It is not a huge issue to me, otherwise I would've voted -1. Regardless, I am happy to see you more frequent releases out of this project. It is a great sign!
On Monday, January 19, 2015, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi James, > > We can debate this off the vote thread if you prefer, but a quick answer > would be that the PMC approves a release. It has absolutely no relation > with who builds it. > > (check) the release process requires code modifications (pom.xml) it MUST > be performed by a committer. > (check) artifacts MUST be digitally signed (PGP) key. > (check) Key MUST be recorded in the repository (KEYS) > (check) Key SHOULD be published in a public key store > (check) Key SHOULD be signed by another ASFer > > The only awkward aspect is that if the release manager is not a PMC > member, he has a non-binding vote on his own release. So if a community > trusts a committer to build a legally binding release, it probably trusts > him to provide project oversight. That's one way to build merit to become a > PMC member. So I don't see anything improper to prompt a *negative* zero. > > Cheers, > Hadrian > > > On 01/19/2015 03:48 PM, James Carman wrote: > >> Hadrian, >> >> I'm not inventing anything and I didn't say it was a rule, only my >> preference: >> >> "Note that the PMC is responsible for all artifacts in their distribution >> directory, which is a subdirectory of www.apache.org/dist/ ; and all >> artifacts placed in their directory must be signed by a committer, >> preferably by a PMC member. It is also necessary for the PMC to ensure >> that >> the source package is sufficient to build any binary artifacts associated >> with the release." >> >> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html >> >> >> On Monday, January 19, 2015, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> +1 (binding) >>> >>> Looks good, solid release, improvement from 5.10.0. Comments: >>> >>> * sigs, legal files, look good >>> * build from source looks good (DbRestartJDBCQueueMasterSlaveL >>> easeQuiesceTest >>> failed, passed on second run) >>> * smoke test in karaf looks good >>> * this is actually the 4th attempt >>> * @James: are we inventing new rules? >>> >>> Somebody, I think Dejan, suggested we should have automated builds on the >>> maintenance branches to spot regressions earlier. Great suggestion, not >>> sure if we should do it for 5.10.x, but definitely for 5.11.x. >>> >>> @Art, great work! This was your first release at ASF if I am not >>> mistaken, >>> right? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Hadrian >>> >>> >>> >>> On 01/15/2015 12:23 PM, James Carman wrote: >>> >>> -0, I would prefer to see the releases signed by a PMC member. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:10 PM, artnaseef <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> The release candidate for the activemq 5.10.1 release is now built and >>>>> ready >>>>> for a vote. >>>>> This release comes with 34 fixes and 1 administrative jira entry. >>>>> >>>>> Please see the list of jira entries here: >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=fixVersion% >>>>> 20%3D%205.10.1%20AND%20project%20%3D%20AMQ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You can get binary distributions here: >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ >>>>> orgapacheactivemq-1013/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/5.10.1/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Source archives are here: >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ >>>>> orgapacheactivemq-1013/org/apache/activemq/activemq-parent/5.10.1/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Maven2 repository is here: >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ >>>>> orgapacheactivemq-1013/ >>>>> >>>>> Source tag: >>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq.git;a=commit;h= >>>>> 8938d14d434447193b02ba635606aa0fb7a80353 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NOTE: I used Hadrian's prior thread as a template (thank you Hadrian). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4. >>>>> nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Apache-ActiveMQ-5-10-1-3rd- >>>>> attempt-tp4689959.html >>>>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>> >>>>> >
