Marko

Congratulations on putting together another great release, hopefully the
IPMC review will go more smoothly this time

Comments inline:

On 01/06/2015 16:31, "Marko Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>The TinkerPop 3.0.0.M9-incubating VOTE is now closed:
>
>       PMC: +1 (4), 0 (0), -1 (0)  -- one from mentor.
>               
>While Apache only recognizes the votes of the PMC,

Not true, only PMC votes are considered legally binding from an ASF
standpoint but the wider community is always welcome (and should be
encouraged) to review and vote on a release.  This is particularly useful
as you promote community members up through the ranks of committer and PMC
as they gain merit since it helps them learn the tasks that a PMC member
has to perform.  In other projects I've been involved in willingness to
actually take the time to review a release has been one of the criteria
we've used to asses potential PMC members.

Note that it is always the PMC (and more specifically the release manager
for the release) who have the final say.  If you get enough binding votes
and have more positive than negative votes a release manager can (but
usually shouldn't) choose to go ahead with the release regardless,
generally it boils down to context.

http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes

If there is a legal issue then you MUST cancel the release and respin to
resolve this as otherwise you can cause serious headaches for the ASF (and
in the worse case the board could formally retract your release) but if it
was some minor functional issue/bug where you wanted to punt it to a
future release then perhaps you would go ahead anyway.  In that case it
would be a judgement call as to how badly the issue would affect the
community in the meantime.

> I think it is important to express the thoughts of the wider community
>given that TinkerPop is leveraged in the products of various graph system
>vendors.
>
>       Committers: +1 (1), 0 (0), -1 (0)
>       Vendors: +1 (3), 0 (0), -1 (0)

It is always acceptable (and encouraged) to include such information in
vote results.

However please remember that Apache projects are supposed to be vendor
neutral and vendor votes should not be treated any differently from votes
by any other community member.  People who work at vendors on products
that use Tinkerpop are always welcome to vote as individual members of the
community, the fact that they happen to work at vendors should not give
their votes any special significance

The general practise that I've seen used in other Apache projects is
simply to report the total number of votes and state how many where
binding in each category.  So for your result you might have instead
reported like so:

  +1 - 7 (4 binding)
   0 - 0
  -1 - 0

Which has the advantage of conveying the necessary legal information from
an ASF standpoint while not treating community votes as a separate lesser
thing

Note that some projects also choose to list the people who voted in each
category though this is more a preference thing and depends on the volume
of votes you receive, smaller projects tend to do this while larger ones
often do not though honestly I haven't seen much consistency around this

Rob




Reply via email to