On 19 March 2014 15:05, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > what has been with the rule that an ipmc must forward the VOTE to the > incubator pmc when it gets started, and those members can also cast a binding > -1 ?
IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding. However, even a binding -1 vote is not a veto - it is just a negative vote. But IMO it would be foolish for an RM to ignore a -1 vote. In PMCs that have been established some time, IME the expectation is that the RM will cancel the vote if the -1 appears to be justified. This means that PMC members who have already voted probably won't revote as a -1 even if they agree with the -1 (perhaps they overlooked that issue - not everyone can check every aspect of a release). If there is some doubt as to whether the -1 should really block the release, IMO the RM should follow up to explain why they think it is not a blocker. So either way, the -1 is resolved before the release proceeds. > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > > On Tuesday, 18 March 2014, 4:10, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 1:10 PM, John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> While not specifically incubator related, was wondering if someone at >>> the incubator may provide me some insight. >>> >>> Right now, release votes cannot be veto'd. This seems like an >>> oversight IMHO. If a release candidate is visibly wrong (e.g. bad >>> licenses, or something else), surely the release candidate can be >>> veto'd no? >>> >> >>This is correct - release votes are not veto-able. >>In my opinion if you have a PMC whose members choose to ignore an >>obviously problematic release, especially from a licensing standpoint, >>then you have much bigger problems with the project. In my experience >>two factors come into play: >>1. The release manager, even with a vote that technically passes, will >>not proceed with a vote where there are obvious major problems, >>especially from a legal perspective. They cancel the vote on their own >>accord. No one wants a majorly flawed release shipping. >>2. Other PMC members heap on -1 votes if it remains open for any >>length of time, effectively causing the vote to fail to pass. >> >>If you can't get agreement on the obviously wrong candidate, perhaps >>it's not as obvious why its wrong. >> >>--David >> >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
