I don't think anyone called those spelling errors as blockers.

As Erik mentioned, you have enough votes to release.  As Release Manager,
you can end this discussion by sending out a vote result email.

Also, just because someone calls a bug a blocker, it does not become one.
A majority of the voters must consider it a blocker and vote -1, which has
obviously not happened here.

Thanks,
Om
On Nov 15, 2014 9:48 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hmmm ... well I prepared the release (Removed the SNAPSHOT from the
> version) and tagged that version so it's exactly the version in the
> distribution.
>
> After publishing the release version, I updated the version of the project
> for the next development iteration to 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT. This is the commit
> with version 7969f7a. If I had tagged that it would have been wrong.
>
> I sort of don't get the problem.
>
> And to the spelling "errors":
> - I definitely wouldn't call errors such as: "Apaches" instead of the
> correct "Apache's" and "bugbase" instead of "bug base" as blocker errors ;-)
> - And please don't let us discuss things like z's ad s's, american english
> or british english as long as it's not klingon english I'll probably
> understand ;-) ... If anyone encounters something like that --> Fix it ...
> discussing such things in lengthy email threads is totally fu**ing up my
> motivation to contribute at all.
>
> Chris
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: Justin Mclean <[email protected]>
> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. November 2014 09:11
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Release Flex-Tool-API?
>
> Hi,
>
> >> Also of a concern is that the pom.xml in version control doesn't match
> >> the one in the distribution. That's probably a blocker and needs to be
> >> fixed.
>
> Sorry ignore that it does look OK - myself and git were having a
> disagreement.
>
> It does look to me that perhaps the tag/build was done one one commit too
> early? ie dfd7067 instead of 7969f7a. That would explain some of the issues
> with the pom.xml
>
> Thanks,
> Justin

Reply via email to