Sebastien,

Yeah, thanks for pointing this out here (I just let him know the same thing
on chat) :)

I believe ASF has or had some tooling which parses mailing list for voting
threads and results and that's also one of the reasons why it's a good idea
to use the prefix.

As far as number of binding +1's goes - we have 3 in case Anthony posts his
explicit +1 vote.

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Anthony,
>
> I did not realize this at first, but it’s good practice to have the vote
> thread prefixed with [VOTE]
> Then do a [RESULTS] thread with the tally.
>
> Then do a tally at the end. Did we get 3 +1 (binding) votes ? if not we
> cannot release.
>
> > On Dec 16, 2015, at 2:51 AM, anthony shaw <anthony.p.s...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, vote is now closed.
> >
> > Proceeding with release of .20.0
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:34 AM, anthony shaw <anthony.p.s...@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Everyone,
> >>
> >> Please can everyone cast their vote today or tomorrow on the release of
> >> .20.0 as communicated in the prior email.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Anthony
> >>
> >> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 7:03 PM, anthony shaw <anthony.p.s...@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 for moving to 1.0.0. I was chuckling yesterday that Putty is still
> >>> v0.69.
> >>>
> >>> Sent from Outlook Mobile <https://aka.ms/qtex0l>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:14 PM -0800, "Tomaz Muraus" <
> to...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Sebastien Goasguen
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'd like to propose keeping the tag as is and moving this into the
> next
> >>>>>> release as a minor (0.21.0)
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I proposed to use 0.21.0 instead of 0.20.0 since the enum int to
> string
> >>>> change is backward incompatible in some scenarios.
> >>>>
> >>>> On a related note - we should really just pull the switch and call
> one of
> >>>> the next releases 1.0.0. Then we can better follow semantic
> versioning :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to