I see your point, but a broken binary shouldn't cause the vote to fail and testing the binaries isn't sufficient to approve a release. The vote is on the source code.
Publishing maven artifacts, binary tarballs, etc. is rote processing of the release approved by the PMC. Others should verify that the binaries work, they correspond with the approved release, and the LICENSE/NOTICE files are updated as required. That part doesn't require a VOTE, though a note to the list saying "hey, I'm about to publish this; anyone see any problems?" is worthwhile. I think one can trust whoever's publishing the artifacts to do a reasonable job of it. -C On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Mohammad Islam <[email protected]> wrote: >> Do we need to vote it again? > > I don't think that should be necessary. In the future, however, it > makes sense to > vote on binary artifacts and maven artifacts at the same time as the > voting happens > on the source artifact. > > And it helps to be explicit about that. > > Thanks, > Roman.
