Hi Bertrand, Again, thanks for taking the time to follow all of these lengthy threads.
I just want to makes sure I understand one point (in-line below): On 12/8/14, 3:02 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: >Git or svn diffs will show how much changed between that new release >and the one that failed, so re-checking the new release is easy: check >the diffs between the new and old Git or svn tags and verify that the >release tarball or other archive matches the content of those svn >tags. Cast your +1 and you're done. > >So once again as per [1] my recommendation would be to not do release >candidates anymore, consider each new set of releasable artifact as a >new release, drop the releases who don't pass and publish those which >do. Letting each (potential) release live in isolation should make >your life easier. Like, dropping this discussion ;-) My takeaway is that we can vote +1 without checking everything each time, and that, by engaging folks to check most things before actually calling for a vote there will be fewer failed votes, but we already saw that, when we thought we’d found everything important and did call for a vote, that a critical problem was found. Even though we don’t have to check everything before voting +1 on the next RC, even the minimal steps you mention take time. Are you opposed to having folks who voted +1 on the prior RC offer carryover votes for those next RCs? Thanks, -Alex > >-Bertrand > >[0] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release >[1] http://markmail.org/message/4ahntni6kzfnwjzw
