incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ant elder <>
Subject Re: Releases and IPMC votes
Date Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:33:12 GMT
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Martijn Dashorst
<> wrote:
> I was under the impression that *any* mentor is an IPMC member, has a
> binding +1 vote for releases and could therefore approve of releases
> without having to go through general@
> While I find it very helpful and valuable for first time releases (and
> first time release managers) to go to general@ the first time,
> consecutive releases could go a lot smoother if Mentor votes were all
> that is required.
> The current policy states:
>> Therefore, should a Podling decide it wishes to perform a release, the Podling SHALL
>> hold a vote on the Podling's public -dev list. At least three +1 votes are required
(see the
>> Apache Voting Process page). If the majority of all votes is positive, then the Podling
>> SHALL send a summary of that vote to the Incubator's general list and formally request
>> the Incubator PMC approve such a release. Three +1 Incubator PMC votes are required.
> So there's not much leeway here. Although the three +1 incubator PMC
> votes are often already satisfied.
> Martijn

There have been numerous releases where we have not followed exactly
that process, two other common approaches these days seem to be:

- the email to general@ says they already have three IPMC +1 votes on
the poddling dev list, there may or may not be comments on the
general@ thread and the release is done anyway after 3 days

- the initial vote email is CC'ed to both the poddling dev list and
general@ and the vote result is tallied from both lists and there may
or may not have been votes on general@

Both of those approaches seem ok to me and I'd be fine with a simpler
and more flexible policy, perhaps saying that the main thing is that
general@ must be notified.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message