On 3 February 2012 10:47, Ate Douma <[email protected]> wrote: > On 02/03/2012 11:00 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: >> >> No need for a vote on this, we agreed the outstanding items weren't >> blockers. Just go ahead and do it under lazy consenus (remember a >> release cannot be vetoed so your time will not be wasted, even if >> someone missed the issues thread) > > > True. > > On the other hand, I'd like to check with you if at least the NOTICE and > LICENSE requirements are properly (or at least good enough) been validated > before you create the tag. If there are serious issues with those, *that* > could result in a blocking -1 vote, either here or else on the final vote on > general@incubator.
Absolutely, but I assumed that we would be asked to review the release before voting on it. I thought the process was: 1) agree it's time to do a release 2) prepare the build src 3) ask for a review of the src (e.g. license headers, notice files etc.) 4) build once we are happy 5) vote on the release >From Ate's mail above it appears that Ate felt this vote was for step 3 whereas I thought it was for step 1. Either way I don't want two votes per release. We should just be voting on step 5) and that should really be a formality since step 3) is where the actual review happens. Step 5) is just making sure the build is from the same src, is signed correctly etc. Seems we need more clarity in what stage Paul thinks he is at. Ross
