Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi Look like the topic changed, somehow? Why? This should a discussion about the possibility and recommendation about **parallel vote**. Let’s stay in that one, OK? Back to the topic, as both IPMC and Zipkin mentor, **parallel vote** is good to improve the slow progress about

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Sorry Justin but this is you looking for “problems” that just are not there and to me it comes across as you taking joy out of frustrating people. Nothing about “nagging mentors privately to vote” holds any additional / relevant information that needs disclosure to the public. So something

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, > I nagged our mentors privately to vote and mentioned that I would be > trying a concurrent vote. IMO that communication should be public, part of doing things at the ASF is being open and tranparent. Again IMO that decision would of been better done via consensus of the PPMC and not

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Yes, we (mentors of Zipkin) were informed about the vote in private mail. I think it should be fine to ping mentor privately about the release vote, as we cannot always monitor the dev mailing list. Otherwise, it will some time for us to response the release vote. Willem Jiang Twitter:

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

> Can you point me to where the PPMC has a discussion about this? I nagged our mentors privately to vote and mentioned that I would be trying a concurrent vote. Everyone in our PPMC is aware of the vote delay problem and this thread. We have had numerous discussions about this topic since

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, > I informed our mentors. Can you point me to where the PPMC has a discussion about this? Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

and I also said in the announcement that this was a concurrent vote. On Sat, May 18, 2019, 7:55 AM Adrian Cole wrote: > I informed our mentors. > > On Sat, May 18, 2019, 2:03 AM Justin Mclean > wrote: > >> HI, >> >> Or better still if you want to try something new / not in line with >> policy

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

I informed our mentors. On Sat, May 18, 2019, 2:03 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > HI, > > Or better still if you want to try something new / not in line with policy > at least discuss it with the IPMC first and give them a heads up that you > are doing so. > > Thanks, > Justin >

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

HI, Or better still if you want to try something new / not in line with policy at least discuss it with the IPMC first and give them a heads up that you are doing so. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, Given your podling has made few releases and each one has had some issues I would suggest you did this too soon, but happy to see what other IPMC members have to say on this. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

FWIW I tried this just recently and was requested to not do it again. Worth knowing https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0571e9dd1b7711c588a38d8a664378ce7df31c72592edcbe8ab8a72b@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E On 2019/04/02 09:30:10, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > Maybe the PPMC and IPMC vote

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

that clearly was needed and tremendously helpful. Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> From: Myrle Krantz Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 7:31:41 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Krantz Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 7:31:41 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 2:09 PM Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: Hi, On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 11:30

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

On 02/04/2019 13.58, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: Hi, On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 11:30 AM Geertjan Wielenga wrote: ...Maybe the PPMC and IPMC vote could run in parallel... I think the reason for having two votes is to give an opportunity for mentors to catch issues in the first one without

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

aka.ms/ghei36> From: Myrle Krantz Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 7:31:41 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 2:09 PM Bertrand Delacreta

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 7:31:41 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 2:09 PM Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 2:09 PM Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 11:30 AM Geertjan Wielenga > wrote: > > ...Maybe the PPMC and IPMC vote could run in parallel... > > I think the reason for having two votes is to give an opportunity for >

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 11:30 AM Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > ...Maybe the PPMC and IPMC vote could run in parallel... I think the reason for having two votes is to give an opportunity for mentors to catch issues in the first one without bothering the IPMC. So maybe run parallel votes from

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Parallel would solve our problem of delayed bookkeeping as well. good idea. It is not so much about about the initial 72 hours, rather the pause then another 72hrs that someone having to remember. Podlings have a stateful experience during a release.. they have to know which are in what stage.

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Maybe the PPMC and IPMC vote could run in parallel -- a key reason why we in Apache NetBeans are looking forward to graduation is that we'll not need to go through the loop of (1) PPMC approves, (2) IPMC rejects, (3) PPMC needs to put together a new release and vote on it again, (4) IPMC rejects

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, I like Craigs suggestion and I'm aware of the problem with the ASF Policy if we would skip the formal IPMC Vote. On the other hand in PLC4X we had a discussion about a regular release cycle to bring new features to the users as fast as possible and decided to skip that for now, to keep the

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

ly without creating additional work for anyone. Ross From: Justin Mclean Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 3:42 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote Hi, When Ross wr

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

TL;DR; I suppose is that in the case of 3 mentor/IPMC already +1 a release we can switch to a "review after commit" style notification so that folks eager to double check can, but not to burden the project or IPMC with a secondary step. This not only reduces bookkeeping but encourages each

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

one part that may not be obvious is the bookkeeping overhead on projects with many repositories and also the load on the IPMC. For example in zipkin, we are migrating several repositories. You can imagine a surge of release verification votes which if people here want to take the burden of

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

> On Apr 1, 2019, at 3:42 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > When Ross wrote “72hrs or 3 +1” I think he was using shorthand, not >> intending to rewrite foundation policy. >> > > Sure I thought so as well, but other newer people here might not of been > aware of it. The only exception

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, When Ross wrote “72hrs or 3 +1” I think he was using shorthand, not > intending to rewrite foundation policy. > Sure I thought so as well, but other newer people here might not of been aware of it. Thanks, Justin >

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Per my reading http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval it’s not OK to stop when you reach 3 +1 votes. Because it’s not 3 +1s absolute, it’s 3 more +1s than -1s. So, you have to have a fixed, reasonable

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, > 72 hours is a guide. As long as your project community is agreeable you can > say "72hrs or 3 +1”. 72 hours is a guide, but recommended, as it gives a chance for all PPMC members to have a look at the release. They may be in different timezone or have day jobs or other things going on,

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi - > On Apr 1, 2019, at 2:51 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > I'd also like to see those mentors / IPMC members vote with more than just a > +1 and provide a list of what they checked. If they could use something like > this all the better [1]. > > I wouldn’t be for removing the

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, I'd also like to see those mentors / IPMC members vote with more than just a +1 and provide a list of what they checked. If they could use something like this all the better [1]. I wouldn’t be for removing the second step of letting the IPMC look at it, reasonably often serious issues are

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Hi, On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 5:30 AM Craig Russell wrote: > > ...This is a proposal to recommend that all Mentors SHOULD vote on podling > releases > prior to sending the release for a vote to the IPMC There's already something about this in the (work in progress)

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 05:15, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Just like so many things, this is how it used to be. In fact, back in the day > the only time the IPMC was asked to vote was when there were not enough > mentor votes. > > If you look at all the podlinga I've mentored I have only ever asked

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

ct: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote I have a related question. In Zipkin (incubating) last release of one of our projects, we had 3 IPMC +1 votes prior to the formal verification vote. Then we basically just waited 72hrs anyway with no additional vot

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Directly on this proposal, I agree. In Zipkin (incubating) we are lucky that mentors are already active. However, we should not take this for granted and certainly it would be harder and more fragile if our mentors were not looking carefully and voting. -A On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 10:30 AM Craig

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

I have a related question. In Zipkin (incubating) last release of one of our projects, we had 3 IPMC +1 votes prior to the formal verification vote. Then we basically just waited 72hrs anyway with no additional votes but it didn't matter as we had what we needed (another came later but still) [1]

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Just like so many things, this is how it used to be. In fact, back in the day the only time the IPMC was asked to vote was when there were not enough mentor votes. If you look at all the podlinga I've mentored I have only ever asked for an IPMC vote on two occasions (that I recall). One