Maybe we can have an 'active consensus' concept, i.e., no one explicitly needs to respond to the thread, but it would be nice if some (especially PMC members did), within a 72 hour period, and if no one objects, with a few having given the go ahead, regardless of how many, so long as it is 'some', i.e., around 3, but not necessarily 3, then it'e a go.
Gj On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 4:46 PM Neil C Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jul 2019, 15:16 Eric Barboni, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Maven artefacts are pom,jar,nbm and also jar with source. > > How does it works for these? Source are from the same git hash but split > > to all the jar? > > Vote required or not in this case ? > > > > Well, the platform source zip isn't voted on either - it's a build artefact > of the full source. But, one thing I'm less sure on - where is the build > code for this process? In the main sources or external? > > I would say we can take Geertjan Lazy consensus for that sanity checking > > > > While that's ok by me, I'd prefer requiring a minimum number of checks and > sign offs. The problem with lazy consensus in this scenario is there's no > guarantee anyone has checked! > > But, happy with whatever the consensus seems to be. Key thing is to be on > the same page the next time we have to deal with it. And we get the rest of > 11.1 up soon! :-) > > Best wishes, > > Neil > > > >
