+1

Volker, perhaps you should modify your -1 to -0.5 in order for the ambiguity
of a veto to be removed. My understanding of reading the voting guidelines
is that -1 stops a release in it's tracks until it is withdrawn.

With regard to inclusion of the sandbox, I think if it is documented as
experimental in nature in the release notes, it would be acceptable.

On Feb 13, 2008 9:11 AM, Udo Schnurpfeil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> +1
>
> I'm lucky with the sandbox in the release, because the sandbox stuff may
> be used and testet with less effort.
> I think there is no benefit to leave it out in the release.
>
> Regards,
>
> Udo
>
> Volker Weber schrieb:
> > Hello,
> >
> > -1
> > (Note: this is no Veto, just a personal oppinion
> > (http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes)<http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes%29>
> )
> >
> > IMHO we should not include sandbox into a release distribution.
> >
> > We could provide a download link to a tagged stable sandbox 1.0.15
> > build, but not inclusde this into a official release.
> > If there is somthing in sandbox which should released we should move it
> to core.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >     Volker
> >
> > 2008/2/11, Bernd Bohmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I would like to release Tobago 1.0.15,
> >>
> >> This release contains only 11 changes.
> >> For a detail list please consult the release notes:
> >>
> >>
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310273&styleName=Html&version=12312929
> >>
> >> The version is available at the staging location and the
> >> revision number of the release is 620572 and tagged as tobago-1.0.15.
> >>
> >> Staging distribution:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~bommel/repo/<http://people.apache.org/%7Ebommel/repo/>
> >>
> >> Staging repository:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~bommel/repo/<http://people.apache.org/%7Ebommel/repo/>
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Bernd
> >>
> >>
> >> The Vote is open for 72h.
> >>
> >> [ ] +1
> >> [ ] +0
> >> [ ] -1
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>



-- 
Grant Smith

Reply via email to