Thanks Romand and Ed for the clarification! I will send the refined vote result in another email.
Best regards, Ruilong Huo On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Ed Espino <[email protected]> wrote: > Ruilong, > > I spoke with Roman this morning. He indicated there is no need to identify > binding/non-binding votes by the PPMC members of Apache incubating > projects. Our incubating project dev votes are simply votes. I incorrectly > assumed we identified our votes in this way. As long HAWQ is incubating, > only the votes by the IPMC will be of the binding/non-binding form. Sorry > for the confusion. > > Regards, > -=e > > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Ed Espino <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks for the correction Roman. I miss-interpreted my membership in the >> IPMC versus the PMC and the use of identifying one's vote as binding or >> non-binding. Can you provide some guidance on the proper usage of binding >> vs. non-binding at it applies to a podling's IPMC members? >> >> Thanks, >> -=e >> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html >> >> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 3:53 AM, Ruilong Huo <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Hi All, >>> > >>> > The VOTE for releasing Apache HAWQ 2.2.0.0-incubating is now >>> > closed. With a total of one +1 binding vote, six +1 not binding vote, >>> and >>> > no -1 vote, the VOTE passes. Overall binding vote breakdown is as >>> follows: >>> > >>> > +1 (binding) 1 >>> > ---------------------------- >>> > * Ed Espino >>> >>> This is incorrect. Ed's vote is NOT binding. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Roman. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *Ed Espino* >> > > > > -- > *Ed Espino* >
