On 11/3/14, 3:30 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >I asked for feedback over a period of a week and only feedback was to >change a title. Without a release candidate is seens to me that people are >unwilling to check things. Right, I understood the prior thread to be a “last call for new features”. Maybe in the future it should be tagged [LAST CALL]. During that phase, we tweaked a few things like the disclaimer. I expected the next step is that you put up a release candidate and open a [DISCUSS] thread, but not a [VOTE] thread. We still have it iron out the wrinkles, but I expected that there wouldn’t be a numbering of the candidates, just a “I have put a package on dist/dev. What do folks think of it?” Then we’d ask folks to try it out and after it appears that enough folks have tried it (and yes, pleading and begging might be involved), then a formal vote would be started. If issues are found during the discussion phase, you can just drop a new package over the old package. No need to cancel vote threads and start new ones. If you do replace the package, note that in the discuss thread with what changed. Folks who’ve already looked at the older package can then decide whether they need to look at the new one. Hopefully they follow commits@ more closely during the discuss phase as well. For TDF, because it is an “app”, if you want more feedback, it might be reasonable to post a deployed version of TDF somewhere like your personal folder so folks who aren’t on the PMC can more easily poke at it. The PMC folks have to vote on the source package, but others should be able to try the binaries without having to download and expand the binary package. -Alex
