Hello, I don't think that any way of producing formal milestones should end up with distributing binaries through ASF sites. I have seen a lot of partial but formal milestones in my life. Can we think of a lightweight but formal milestone, which is limited to a letter from Stepan which contains <revision number> + <release name>, a formal vote which does not have votes against, and a news feed on the our side which reports the revision and the name?
Thanks. On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/24/08, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Ellison writes: > > > > > > I'm really not convinced this is a good idea for Harmony, and my > > > concerns are in two parts: > > > > > > 1) Our schedule should not be dictated by an external project, > > > especially when it is their process that seems to be setting the > > > artificial time limit. Why not show some flexibility to meet our > > > dates? > > > > > > 2) Our principle delivery mechanism is source code. While we make > > > binaries available as a convenience we should not encourage dependents > > > to put dependencies on our build tools. They should take source and > > > compile it themselves for their own environment. > > > > I agree with Tim on this issue. I think making a release, with the > > testing, evaluation and voting involved, should not be something that > > downstream projects dictate. Doing this release would seem to set a > > precedent that I would not be happy with. > > > > I would be inclined to vote -1 for any formal release that isn't simply > > the next milestone release. Of course, this is not necessarily my final > > decision. > > > > The downstream project should use our current release or if they have > > a desperate need for something more recent then they should be more > > flexible. > > > > It makes me sad :-( > > We ask another project to be more flexible but we are not ready to be > flexible too - we scheduled M6 to mid of May and we couldn't move it > to the end of April. We are discussing the request almost for 2 weeks > (this time is enough to make full milestone testing cycle) and I've > not heard any strong argument for having it in mid of May expect that > we scheduled it to this date. ;-( > > Thanks, > Stepan. > > > Regards, > > Mark. > > > > > > > -- With best regards, Alexei
