On Monday 20 July 2015 15:45:14 Robert Munteanu wrote: > Hi, hi Robert,
> It's unclear to me how to handle a release vote when the artifacts are > changed during the vote. E.g. > > - start release on 2015-04-01 > - a problem is discovered on 2015-04-02 > - the problem is fixed on 2015-04-03 > > Is it OK to continue with the vote or do we mandate that the vote is > cancelled? we really should cancel and start over. > If we decide it's OK to continue with the vote we also need to decide > what to do with: > > - +1 votes on the previous artifacts ( probably ignore ) > - -1 votes on the previous artifacts ( probably keep as vetos unless > the voter withdraws/recasts the vote ) > - the duration of the vote ( probably restart the 72 hours count ) all your points +1, but I prefer to cancel (though I didn't asked for last week). > I don't have a very strong opinion about this, but I would be less > confused if releases were immutable :-) and any change of the artifacts > under vote would mean cancelling the vote and starting a new one. But > I'm happy to do what works for everyone, given what we have clear rules > for it. +1 And using a dedicated repo per artifact means less work if only one of a bunch fails. One more point: versions - reuse or increase? Although versions are cheap for us, it confuses our users when versions are "missing". It's even more confusing that AEM 6.1 uses Sling i18n 2.4.0 which was _not_ released. So I'm for reusing here. Regards, O. > Cheers, > > Robert
