On Thursday 08 November 2007, Martin Ritchie wrote: > Yes you have to go to the IPMC to approve the release. From my > understanding there is still some debate about the level of review > that the IPMC performs. Is it purely legal checks or are there > functional tests also done.
Purely legal. From their standpoint, the code could not work, not meet any users needs, etc.... They just need to make sure all the legal ducks are in a row. > I have also seen concerns raised on the > general list when podlings take the vote to the general list to get > the 3 required votes. Hmmm... Haven't ever seen that concern. CXF has NEVER gotten 3 binding votes before heading to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only 2 active mentors) (The vote running now might be the first. Need one more and I expect that today) I don't think Tuscany ever has either. In fact, several mentors I've talked to will NOT vote until the vote is on [EMAIL PROTECTED] They think by voting on the dev vote, they could "influence" other people on the project. They specifically want to see how the community conducts their votes and own audits and stuff WITHOUT their involvement first. This is especially true if the project is getting closer to graduation and the project SHOULD be able to do as much as it can itself. The concern is if, after the two votes, none of the mentors have voted. That definitely is a concern. > Now here is where my knowledge gets a little hazy. Are all mentors on > the IPMC ? Hopefully yes, but not in all cases. That's another thing they keep going back and forth on. Some mentors are PMC on the "sponsoring" project, but that doesn't make them IPMC's. Usually, they try to get 3 IPMC mentors though. > If so then is it a release notification email that is sent > to general giving them 72hours to point out anything that they think > the mentors missed? Or have I go the wrong end of the stick here. It's not a release notification that is sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's a full vote. That said, all binding votes from BOTH votes count. Thus, if you DO have three here and don't get any there, that's OK as long as you do still conduct the vote there. > I remember there being numerous discussions on the general list but > none of the documentation seems to get updated. That seems to be the Apache way. :-( -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer IONA P: 781-902-8727 C: 508-380-7194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog
