incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: Process question on release votes
Date Wed, 19 Mar 2014 17:48:45 GMT
On 19 March 2014 15:05, Mark Struberg <> wrote:
> what has been with the rule that an ipmc must forward the VOTE to the incubator pmc when
it gets started, and those members can also cast a binding -1 ?

IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding.
However, even a binding -1 vote is not a veto - it is just a negative vote.

But IMO it would be foolish for an RM to ignore a -1 vote.

In PMCs that have been established some time, IME the expectation is
that the RM will cancel the vote if the -1 appears to be justified.
This means that PMC members who have already voted probably won't
revote as a -1 even if they agree with the -1 (perhaps they overlooked
that issue - not everyone can check every aspect of a release).

If there is some doubt as to whether the -1 should really block the
release, IMO the RM should follow up to explain why they think it is
not a blocker.

So either way, the -1 is resolved before the release proceeds.

> LieGrue,
> strub
> On Tuesday, 18 March 2014, 4:10, David Nalley <> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 1:10 PM, John D. Ament <> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> While not specifically incubator related, was wondering if someone at
>>> the incubator may provide me some insight.
>>> Right now, release votes cannot be veto'd.  This seems like an
>>> oversight IMHO.  If a release candidate is visibly wrong (e.g. bad
>>> licenses, or something else), surely the release candidate can be
>>> veto'd no?
>>This is correct - release votes are not veto-able.
>>In my opinion if you have a PMC whose members choose to ignore an
>>obviously problematic release, especially from a licensing standpoint,
>>then you have much bigger problems with the project. In my experience
>>two factors come into play:
>>1. The release manager, even with a vote that technically passes, will
>>not proceed with a vote where there are obvious major problems,
>>especially from a legal perspective. They cancel the vote on their own
>>accord. No one wants a majorly flawed release shipping.
>>2. Other PMC members heap on -1 votes if it remains open for any
>>length of time, effectively causing the vote to fail to pass.
>>If you can't get agreement on the obviously wrong candidate, perhaps
>>it's not as obvious why its wrong.
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message