>> >> The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes >> indicated with a "*" next to their name: >> >> +1 : Edison*, Chiradeep*, Sebastien*, Prasanna*, Rajesh Batala, Ove Ewerlid >> -1 : Marcus*, Chip*, Simon Weller >> > > FWIW, I am very disappointed by this vote. The result does not matter, the > number of people voting is worrisome to me. > > We have over ~70 apache committers on CloudStack, why didn't people vote ? > > -sebastien
So I am not so much worried about the number of people voting. I look at projects like httpd and see similar vote numbers. Evaluating a release, at least for me, takes a considerable amount of time. It easily consumes a full half-day of my time, and I take that as a serious responsibility. Life, however, also gets in the way. If we struggled to get 3 votes, I'd be worried. Instead we have 6 binding votes, and 3 non-binding votes. I don't consider that a bad turnout. There's also a certain fatigue that I think comes with having to spin multiple RCs. I really do wonder if we shouldn't set expectations for both ourselves and our users on what our release criteria is. Perfection isn't a reasonable - and we don't want to let the perfect get in the way of the good. At the same time we can't ship shoddy quality. Take Fedora's process which has three criteria stages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Alpha_Release_Criteria https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Beta_Release_Criteria https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Final_Release_Criteria Perhaps we can take some of that and benefit from it. --David
