incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Responsibilities and Improvements (was: Re: Whimsy general@ subs check (was: .... introduce "[DISCUSS]" threads for podling ... release candidates))
Date Mon, 04 Mar 2019 05:50:22 GMT
On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 9:58 PM Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
> > On Mar 3, 2019, at 6:15 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Acts of the Foundation require specific oversight of the IPMC. To
> establish
> > that "act", we have the (3) +1 vote rule of IPMC members. The IPMC cannot
> > delegate this power further, as each IPMC member is specifically
> empowered
> > by the Board. So PPMC members cannot act for the Foundation since they
> > haven't been empowered by the Board.
> >
> > Again, the above is premised on *needing* that particular empowerment. If
> > podling releases are no longer required to be official, then quite a bit
> > can be changed.
> >
> I believe that this would be a disaster. I choose this word carefully.
>
> In your proposal, would podlings' bad releases use the official Apache
> distribution mechanisms? dist.apache.org, signatures, checksums and the
> mirror systems and KEYS and such?
>

No idea. I believe that a lot of the current issue, bureaucracy, and
drive-by are related making "releases" ASF-compliant.

Yet I seem to recall a time when these releases could have mistakes. These
are podlings, after all. It is expected. It will get fixed next time.

So I think a major problem to solve is "making non-official releases", and
to your point: how to differentiate those from "official releases".

Cheers,
-g

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message