On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 15:13 +0000, Moore, Jonathan wrote: > As a general rule, what should I be looking at as an "informed voter"? I'm > pretty familiar with the contents of the caching module, and think the > content there is ready for release...is that enough for the vote, or do we > also double-check the artifacts (I.e. Do we verify maven did its job > right, etc.)? What else do people look at? >
There are no specific guidelines I know of. Various people look at various things prior to casting a vote. I personally mostly rely on my gut feel. If I have been following a project on a regular basis and am convinced its design / architecture / QA process are adequate and believe that the particular piece of code being released is in a good shape I usually check only a few things, such as whether or not the release artifacts can be built from source distribution and the resultant artifacts meet ASL legal requirements (NOTICE and LICENSE bits are present, etc). Given those criteria I feel comfortable casting a vote. By the way: we DO encourage all members of the community to cast a vote on releases even if their votes are non binding. Often a PMC member with a binding vote may decide to vote differently based on feedback given by other people. Cheers Oleg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
