On Jul 10, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org wrote:
also I would be +++1 for making fix dates for releases, f.e. lets say 4 times
a year which means all 3 months - and then doing the release *REGARDLESS* if
we have thing hanging in STATUS or not! What doesnt go into this
-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski
Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Juli 2013 13:51
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 'RM' Baton
On Jul 10, 2013, at 6:30 PM, Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org wrote:
also I would be +++1 for making fix dates for releases, f.e. lets
Fellow httpd devs,
A major problem which has occurred repeatedly, since the rapid pace of
release candidates in the 2.0 series, is that the RM baton has been
announced and dropped on the ground for weeks, if not many months. The
prime directive of open source at the ASF is to release early and
On 10 Jul 2013, at 8:41 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
A major problem which has occurred repeatedly, since the rapid pace of
release candidates in the 2.0 series, is that the RM baton has been
announced and dropped on the ground for weeks, if not many months. The
prime
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:41 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.netwrote:
Fellow httpd devs,
A major problem which has occurred repeatedly, since the rapid pace of
release candidates in the 2.0 series, is that the RM baton has been
announced and dropped on the ground for weeks, if not
I think the problem with no-one picking up the baton on a stalled
release is just a different angle on the same participation problem --
what little resource there is gobbled up by non-RM activities (some of
it self imposed overhead as you outlined in the other thread).
So my concern with the
-Original Message-
From: Graham Leggett [mailto:]
Sent: Mittwoch, 10. Juli 2013 10:12
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 'RM' Baton
On 10 Jul 2013, at 8:41 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
wrote:
Proposed: An RM intent-to-tag announcement is valid
-1.
On Jul 10, 2013, at 2:41 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
Fellow httpd devs,
A major problem which has occurred repeatedly, since the rapid pace of
release candidates in the 2.0 series, is that the RM baton has been
announced and dropped on the ground for weeks, if
Considering that I've been the only RM for 2.4.x, I can't help but
assume that Bill is referring to me.
As mentioned by others, by indicating a desire to TR, it energizes
people to catch up on STATUS, place their votes and propose backports.
So it is *expected* that at a time when things should
On 7/10/2013 7:13 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
So my concern with the proposal -- are there really wiling/able RM's
waiting in the wings in these periods? If they're there -- are they
afraid of stepping on an RM's toes, or of drawing a line in the sane
for the half-approved backports?
(I have
As someone who's done most of the 2.4 releases, my goal has
always been to ensure that whatever we release has as much
trunk-goodness as possible. The more deviation there is between
trunk and 2.4 the worse it is, imo, because it makes 2.4 less
appealing.
We are now currently using trunk pretty
On 10.07.2013 15:22, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Considering that I've been the only RM for 2.4.x, I can't help but
assume that Bill is referring to me.
As mentioned by others, by indicating a desire to TR, it energizes
people to catch up on STATUS, place their votes and propose backports.
So it is
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org wrote:
I was also thinking about learning how to release - but the lack of proper
documentation for the whole process holds me back; I remember how Graham
fell from one trap into another when he did his 1st APR release, and I dont
13 matches
Mail list logo
