Cliff Woolley wrote:
I still think this is an over-reaction as no one operated in bad faith here. I maintain that any effort would be better placed at fixing the problems and rolling a new apr-iconv 1.1.0 that fixes whatever problem you seem to think is present today. That could likely be done in less time with less animosity and less emails. -- justin
For what it's worth, I agree with Justin here.
FWIW, it does appear to me that the releases did go out
quite quickly... Why the rush?
Tuesday: Tagged, and sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thursday Night: Took my count of the votes, latter pushed the files to the mirrors.
Friday Morning: Sent out the announcements.
I didn't feel I did it in a rush. I don't feel it was an excessively fast release cycle. Sure, it didn't take months, but I don't think APR 1.0.0 is the best example of a release cycle.
I was partially motivated to complete it before this weekends infrathon. I did not want to have to deal with this next week. Since many of the ASF resources would not be available during the weekend, my personal target when I started the cycle was to release on Friday. If there weren't enough votes, or there were other issues, I would of held it up.
I sent an email Thursday night, declaring my count of the votes. If there was a problem, I would of hoped it would of been brought up then.
When I counted the votes, I interpreted all of the +1s to be for the entire group (apr, apr-util, apr-iconv). I am sorry if I misinterpreted any of the votes. This was not my intention.
I believe the best course of action is to fix apr-iconv, and then release 1.1.0.
-Paul
