On 2/7/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/7/07, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > No, it implies no such thing. A binding +1 for GA is a statement that you > believe that the code is of a quality commensurate with a release to a > general audience. It is not an implication of personal support or anything > else. Further, a determination of GA status is up to each PMC member to > make, and does not require anything in the way of deployment, production > usage, or anything else of the sort. From our bylaws: "The act of voting carries certain obligations. Voters are not only stating their opinion, they are also agreeing to help do the work." * http://struts.apache.org/dev/bylaws.html I would suggest that the work of a GA release includes helping by applying patches and answering posts to the user list.
In earlier Struts releases, we have taken this to mean that someone is willing to help produce the release. I don't see how that morphs into a commitment to support the release after the fact. Our language is taken from the HTTPD guidelines
* http://httpd.apache.org/dev/guidelines.html which also mentions that "On some issues, this vote is only binding if the voter has tested the action on their own system(s)." I would suggest that in terms of a vote on a GA release, this means that the voter is using the bits in production ("eating our own dog food").
Yes, well _suggesting_ that is fine; making it a requirement is not. The need for production testing is also mentioned in the HTTPD release
guidelines. * http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html under "How can an RM be confident in a release?" Of course, it also says "each committer is free to come up with their own personal voting guidelines", which is why I used the word "implies" rather than a more concrete term like "means".
If a PMC member is voting +1 on a GA, but hasn't used the release in
production, or does not intend to support the release afterwards, personally, I'd like to know that, so that other volunteers are not left "holding the bag".
Not everyone is in a position to use a release "in production" the way you suggest, and certainly not in the timeframe required for a release vote. What if I'm developing a product that won't ship for another year? Are you saying that I can't vote GA, even if I think it's a rock solid release, just because I can't ship a product built on it for another 12 months? I hope not. And what changed, and when, from the Struts 1 model? Back when I was the release manager for Struts 1.x, there were no statements about being "in production" before voting, and I certainly voted +1 for several releases on the basis of comprehensive testing that I'd performed, not whether I had it in production or not. Given that I was working on long-term products at the time (as I am now), there's no way I could have had it in production in time fr the vote anyway. -- Martin Cooper -Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
