Henri,
I appreciate what you did to help the POI project stand up and meet
Apache requirements. It is an ongoing process - I think the
subproject is close to doing it correctly and having a successful
release!
Cheers!
Dave Fisher
On Mar 19, 2007, at 10:58 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
On 3/18/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/14/07, Vadim Gritsenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
> > You actually have to roll and sign a tarball/zip ball on which
the vote
> > happens. "Release-then-Vote" seems to be the only accepted way
by the
> > board these days;
>
> Thankfully, neither events in velocity-private nor board
feelings apply here.
> Either Jakarta PMC votes for it or receives an resolution,
before that happens,
> existing procedures [1] stay.
There are (to my knowledge) three types of vote/release styles that
have been happening at the ASF.
1) A vote to do a release, with no sign of release files. This is how
this thread started and it's against ASF policy.
2) A vote on release-candidate files (or -dev in your case), and then
a release that is trusted to be a repeat of the process used. This is
currently a grey area policy-wise, and is where this release moved to
with the ~/vgritsenko/*-dev files.
3) Creating the actual files that are going to be released and voting
on them. There's pressure to go this way, but it's not the policy
yet.
> > personally I do prefer "Vote-then-Release" myself but
> > that seems to be the way it is.
Release-then-Vote has some nice parts, the actual release is really
easy. That's nice if the release process has been painful as it means
I don't have to remember how to do the damn thing. Vote-then-Release
is nice in that you don't end up doing as many vote builds.
Other parts of the ASF seem to do a release where they make a build
and if it passes a vote it goes out, if it doesn't then they up the
bugfix number and do it again (I don't think anyone actually has a
build number, ie: 1.3.5.7). They also have an alpha/beta/GA thing
that
the version number doesn't show. Very confusing as a user I think.
Mostly at this stage the mandate is that we have to be voting on
release files, not on "Hey, how about a release".
This has been a pointless thread. Most of the people on the thread are
Members, so if someone could kick it off on members@ then I think
you'll see a much more informed discussion going on.
This 'how we release' conversation has been bouncing around the ASF
for 4 months now, the above is my best grok on the summary. I've not
seen anyone yet speaking in favour of a view that we should have a
vote on the idea of releasing and then someone does it when they can.
Please bring that up on members@ Vadim - good luck.
The reason for members existing (imo) is to provide a backbone to an
otherwise disparate and completely unrelated huge set of communities.
That means showing a bit more empathy and a bit less round and round
arguments.
Course, I'm grumpy and I've got zero patience for reading mailing list
threads over 5 emails nowadays for some reason.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
