Just digged a it i our mailinglist:http://markmail.org/thread/jiopzlaz3w4jvjfa
I still like the idea of Stephen:My preference is that the criteria is "at
least 3 * +1 from mojo
developers OR 72h lazy consensus whichever comes first". Robert
> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 08:13:37 -0800
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] FW: gwt-maven-plugin releases
>
> Hi MOJO team,
>
> I would prefer a voting period even as short as 24 hours, to give
> mojo dev a chance to looking into. and I dont want outside world
> would think MOJO is just dumping ground move artifact to Central. and
> finally with a policy in place, it would make the release dev think
> twice about cutting the release in in term of quality.
>
> My 2 cents
>
> -D
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 7:05 AM, Robert Scholte <[email protected]> wrote:
> > FYI
> >
> > Robert
> > ________________________________
> > From: [email protected]
> > Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 15:54:53 +0100
> > Subject: Re: gwt-maven-plugin releases
> > To: [email protected]
> > CC: [email protected]
> >
> > [+cc [email protected], there's no
> > reason to keep it private]
> >
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > Let me first put things in context:
> > - this project is at mojo historically; it was probably the best place at
> > the time to get some visibility (and we can probably thank Mojo for that)
> > - if I hadn't taken over the leadership, it'd probably be dead now. I took
> > the lead because I needed a few things and nobody were taking over from
> > ndeloof. Actually I didn't take the lead, I'm only a de facto leader: I'm
> > making releases because I need them, and I've been given the authorizations.
> > - the project already "broke" the mojo rules before I came to maintain it,
> > by moving the sources to github (OK, not completely moving per se, as they
> > were sync'd to the svn)
> >
> > On a day to day basis, maintenance is a pain: the project's code quality &
> > design choices (YMMV), having to mirror github to svn from time to time
> > (which is still better than using svn or even git-svn), deploying sites to
> > codehaus using webdav (even worst that only to update the plugins page I had
> > to wait 3 minutes that the upload finishes; 3 minutes only for 4 chars
> > removed in one file).
> >
> > I don't enjoy maintaining this plugin. I do it because it has to be done,
> > and I need it to be done.
> >
> > Furthermore, I'm moving GWT itself to Maven (from Ant) and having a plugin
> > in GWT proper seems the logical thing to do going forward. I'm also working
> > on a new plugin (from scratch) to that effect. If all goes well, you can
> > expect 2.5.0 to be the last release at codehaus, at least by me.
> >
> > You'd understand then that I don't really mind following the rules.
> > Moreover, I strongly believe users of the plugin aren't looking at the mojo
> > mailing list to follow the releases, they follow maven-users list, the
> > dedicated Google Groups, the GitHub commits and/or me on Twitter or Google+,
> > I don't see any value in subscribing to a mailing list just so that I can
> > post to it, and will never read it (meaning I won't read replies to the
> > things I'd post; such as Anders' post).
> >
> > Don't take it as an attack or whatever against Mojo. I'm just being
> > pragmatic and willfully refusing to "take part in Mojo": it's not my thing,
> > I didn't want it, yet it's still better than a fork. In case I need to
> > release a 2.5.0-1 or 2.5.1 version of the gwt-maven-plugin, I can already
> > tell you that I won't change anything to my procedure (or leave it to
> > someone else to follow the mojo rules). If that means the project is no
> > longer welcome at mojo, then I'll either leave it or move it elsewhere
> > (rather leave it, given that I'm writing a replacement plugin).
> >
> > Oh, and BTW, there was a vote for 2.5.0-rc2:
> > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/codehaus-mojo-gwt-maven-plugin-users/ErZsnMIbOp0/discussion
> > (and I did put [email protected] in copy, but as you said, I'm not
> > subscribed to any mojo-codehaus list, so it was bounced).
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >
> > Le 6 nov. 2012 20:24, "Robert Scholte" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> >
> > Hello Thomas,
> >
> > I noticed you released the gwt-maven-plugin recently.
> > I was kind of surprised, because I didn't received a call for vote, as we do
> > for all mojo releases.
> > Anders Hammar already tried to make this clear [1], but it seems like you're
> > not subscribed to this list.
> > If you're not subscribed to any of the mojo-codehaus lists, it's not
> > possible to send announcements to them.
> >
> > We ask you to follow the release procedures with care next time[2]
> > It's not meant to be bureaucratic, but gives the team a change validate the
> > plugin.
> > I'd like to have feedback on my releases from the team, so no stupid
> > mistakes are pushed to Maven Central.
> > And I sure hope you do that too.
> >
> > best regards,
> >
> > Robert Scholte
> >
> > [1] http://markmail.org/message/dkquazoudcecyl3y
> > [2] http://mojo.codehaus.org/development/performing-a-release.html
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
