I guess it depends on how you interpret this [1], which implies that users 
interested in release candidates should be subscribed to the dev@ mailing list. 
Though I imagine some tweaks to the wording of a release VOTE could make it 
acceptable to CC @user.

-Taylor

[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#release-types

> On Apr 5, 2016, at 9:11 AM, Bobby Evans <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> It is also in the bylaws as the place that we will post it.
> 
> http://storm.apache.org/contribute/BYLAWS.html#actions
> Look under the table for product release.
> 
> | Product Release | A vote is required to accept a proposed release as an 
> official release of the project. Any Committer may call for a release vote at 
> any point in time. | Majority Approval | Active PMC members | 3 days | 
> [email protected] |
> 
> 
> Those are the minimum requirements.  I personally would like to see much 
> wider participation, and would be happy to see it mirrored on the users list, 
> if we think that we will get some more users to participate in testing it out 
> and in voting for/against it. Even if their vote is not officially binding I 
> believe the entire PMC would take a -1 with a valid reason seriously from 
> anyone.
>  - Bobby
> 
>    On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 7:37 AM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Julien,
> 
> AFAIK, posting VOTE to dev@ list meets common practice in Apache projects.
> I subscribed dev@ list of Storm, Spark, HBase, (incubating) Zeppelin,
> Kafka, and all projects only include dev@ to VOTE thread.
> 
> Users and contributors can still vote as non-binding in VOTE thread in dev@
> list. Only we can do is voting to keep noticing to dev@ subscribers. ;)
> 
> Thanks,
> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
> 
> 2016년 4월 5일 (화) 오후 6:02, Julien Nioche <[email protected]>님이 작성:
> 
>> What about including user@ in this discussion? Users' votes are non
>> binding
>> but it is a good way of getting more people to test the RCs. This is common
>> practice in other Apache projects
>> 
>> Julien
>> 
>> On 5 April 2016 at 00:05, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> We're releasing the first major version, so I'd like to make it less
>>> error-prone as possible.
>>> Moreover no one except me test and vote. Seems like voting in weekend
>>> doesn't work.
>>> 
>>> Let's have RC2 and participate voting.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
>>> 
>>> 2016년 4월 5일 (화) 오전 6:29, Harsha <[email protected]>님이 작성:
>>> 
>>>> Taylor,
>>>>           Lets do another release build since we have other jiras merged
>>>>           in .
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Harsha
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016, at 02:07 PM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote:
>>>>> FYI I’ve merged fixes for following to the 1.x-branch:
>>>>>   * STORM-1670: LocalState#get(String) can throw FileNotFoundException
>>>>>   which may result supervisor.clj#sync-processes stop assigning new
>>>>>   workers/assignments
>>>>>   * STORM-1677: Test resource files are excluded from source
>>> distribution,
>>>>>   which makes logviewer-test failing
>>>>> 
>>>>> Still waiting to hear opinions on whether we should cancel this vote
>>> and
>>>>> cut a new RC.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I’m leaning toward a new RC at this point.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Taylor
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Apr 4, 2016, at 11:50 AM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The question at this point is whether we want to cancel the release
>>>> vote and cut a new RC, or move forward with this one.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don’t see the test issue as critical — users will still be able
>> to
>>>> build the software with the `-DskipTests=true` flag. I also feel that
>>> once
>>>> the 1.0 release is out we will go into a phase where we release updates
>>>> (e.g. 1.0.x, 1.x) at a relatively rapid rate.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I could go either way. What does everyone else think?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Taylor
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Apr 2, 2016, at 10:51 PM, Harsha <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For rc2  please include STORM-1670 as well. Source distribution is
>>>>>>> important as well.
>>>>>>> -Harsha
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016, at 01:02 AM, Jungtaek Lim wrote:
>>>>>>>> Here's my test,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> - testing with source distribution : FAIL
>>>>>>>> - unzip : OK
>>>>>>>> - building from source dist : FAIL
>>>>>>>>   - how to build: running `mvn -P all-tests clean install` on
>>>> unzipped
>>>>>>>> source dist.
>>>>>>>>   - Test resource files (.log) are excluded from source
>>> distribution,
>>>>>>>> which makes logviewer-test failing.
>>>>>>>>     - filed issue :
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1677
>>>>>>>>     and
>>>>>>>> submit a patch via pull request
>>>>>>>>   - after applying PR, tests are all passed.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> - testing with binary distribution (one machine) : OK
>>>>>>>> - launch daemons : OK
>>>>>>>> - run RollingTopWords (local) : OK (with minor issue)
>>>>>>>>   - process doesn't terminate until killing manually or pressing
>>>> Ctrl +
>>>>>>>>   C
>>>>>>>> - run RollingTopWords (remote) : OK
>>>>>>>>   - activate / deactivate / rebalance / kill : OK
>>>>>>>>   - logviewer (worker dir, daemon dir) : OK
>>>>>>>>   - change log level : OK
>>>>>>>>   - thread dump, heap dump, restart worker : OK
>>>>>>>> - run WordCountTopology (remote) : OK
>>>>>>>>   - multiple workers and multi-lang bolt
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Minor but just leaving note: I saw /log (logviewer) throwing HTTP
>>>> STATUS
>>>>>>>> 500 sometimes, but I can't reproduce it. At that time,
>> deep-search
>>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>>> work at that topology, too.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Total
>>>>>>>> - source distribution: -1
>>>>>>>> - binary distribution: +1
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I don't know how it is important to build with source
>> distribution,
>>>> but
>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>> can address STORM-1677 and initiate voting RC2 immediately
>> although
>>>> we
>>>>>>>> think it's a 'blocker' issue.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 2016년 4월 2일 (토) 오전 8:50, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>님이
>>> 작성:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.0.0 (rc1)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Full list of changes in this release:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG.md;hb=787e4a6c375d290f724e59b3d8ebe34806ccd0d5
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The tag/commit to be voted upon is v1.0.0:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=tree;h=45b1b148401fd05f0f79cc7abdf6b5c7fc43df20;hb=d02f94268dec229d1125a24fdf53fa303cbc2b29
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The source archive being voted upon can be found here:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-1.0.0/apache-storm-1.0.0-src.tar.gz
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-1.0.0/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The Nexus staging repository for this release is:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1027/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 1.0.0.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the
>> release.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 1.0.0
>>>>>>>>> [ ]  0 No opinion
>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release. This is a
>>> major
>>>>>>>>> milestone of which we should all be proud.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> This is not an April fools joke. ;)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> -Taylor
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Email had 1 attachment:
>>>>> + signature.asc
>>>>>   1k (application/pgp-signature)
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering*
>> 
>> http://www.digitalpebble.com
>> http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/
>> #digitalpebble <http://twitter.com/digitalpebble>
>> 
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to