juneau-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Bognar <james.bog...@salesforce.com>
Subject Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Juneau 6.2.0-incubating RC1
Date Tue, 25 Apr 2017 02:40:13 GMT
Done.

Thanks!

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:37 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
wrote:

> The requirement is that you get 3 +1's on the dev list.  There is no
> requirement for PPMC, IPMC or other to factor into these counts.
>
> So change this line
>
> If the vote has not passed (less than +3 IPMC/PPMC, or more negative than
> positive) then you will need to pull the release candidate and start over
> after addressing the concerns.
>
> To
>
> If the vote has not passed (less than +3 votes, or more negative than
> positive) then you will need to pull the release candidate and start over
> after addressing the concerns.
>
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:33 PM James Bognar <jamesbognar@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I think I got it.  Please review the following instructions and feel free
> > to make edits if necessary:
> >
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/JUNEAU/New+
> release+guidelines#Newreleaseguidelines-4-Voting
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 8:34 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 8:31 PM Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mentor hat on.
> > > >
> > > > I would recommend *not* using the term "binding" for anything related
> > to
> > > > the PPMC.
> > > >
> > > > Binding votes are a term of art when applied to a PMC.
> > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#binding-votes
> > > >
> > > > It's up to the PPMC whether votes by community members should be
> > counted
> > > > toward the three +1 votes on the dev list. Hopefully, there will be
> > three
> > > > votes by PPMC members to forward the vote to the IPMC. It's fine to
> > > include
> > > > community votes when forwarding the vote to the IPMC. It's fine to
> > > separate
> > > > community votes from PPMC votes. It's best to not refer to binding
> > votes
> > > at
> > > > this level.
> > > >
> > > > At the IPMC level "binding" votes are cast by IPMC members. No one
> > else.
> > > >
> > > > > On Apr 24, 2017, at 6:58 AM, James Bognar <jamesbognar@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this correct?...
> > > > >
> > > > > On the podling-level vote, anyone listed as a current member here
> > > > > <http://juneau.incubator.apache.org/index.html#community.html>
is
> a
> > > > > "binding" vote.  Anyone else can vote as non-binding.  PPMC members
> > > votes
> > > > > carry over as "binding" on the incubator-level vote.
> > > >
> > > > No. This is correct:
> > > >
> > > > On the podling-level vote, anyone listed as a current member here
> > > > <http://juneau.incubator.apache.org/index.html#community.html> is
a
> > > > PPMC vote.  Anyone else can vote as non-PPMC.  Only IPMC members
> votes
> > > > carry over as "binding" on the incubator-level vote.
> > > >
> > > > So, you may like to summarize the dev list vote thusly:
> > > >
> > > > Voting for Apache Juneau 6.2.0-incubating is now closed. The release
> > > > has passed with the following tally:
> > > >
> > > > +1s:
> > > > James Bognor (PPMC)
> > > > Steve Blackmon (PPMC)
> > > > John D. Ament (IPMC)
> > > > Craig Russell (IPMC)
> > > > Joey Frazee
> > > >
> > > > Thanks everyone who voted!
> > > >
> > > > I understand this is a bit of intricacy but "binding" is a
> > long-standing
> > > > term that even predates the existence of the incubator.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Personally, I'd just avoid listing out anything other IPMCs in special
> > > manner.
> > >
> > > I also want to point out this section of our website -
> > > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html#PPMC+binding+votes -
> which
> > > matches some broad discussion had on what makes a binding vote, and
> when
> > (I
> > > initiated it, because a lot of podlings like to misuse binding).
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Craig
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:48 AM, James Bognar <
> jamesbognar@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Thanks John.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'll update the release guidelines to make this clear.  It's
easy
> to
> > > > >> forget these intricacies.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:46 AM, John D. Ament <
> > > john.d.ament@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:06 AM Jochen Wiedmann <
> > > > >>> jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 3:57 PM, John D. Ament <
> > > johndament@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>> Jochen, sorry but I'm going to disagree with you
on this.  PPMC
> > > votes
> > > > >>> are
> > > > >>>>> only binding for accepting committers/PPMC members.
 They are
> not
> > > > >>> binding
> > > > >>>>> for releases.  The fact that the podling voted positively
to
> > > release
> > > > >>> is
> > > > >>>> an
> > > > >>>>> important sign, and what needs to be carried forward
to the
> IPMC.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> All the better!
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>> I'm not sure what to do with this response.  However, I wanted
to
> > > cite
> > > > the
> > > > >>> existing policy document [1].
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> 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.
> > > > Below
> > > > >>> is
> > > > >>> an example showing how an incubating project managed this
> process:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Therefore, its clear that the binding/non-binding status
is
> > > irrelevant
> > > > on
> > > > >>> the dev list.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.
> htm
> > > > >>> l#Releases
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Jochen
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> --
> > > > >>>> The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!"
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> http://www.keystonedevelopment.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/
> > > > >>> 2014/10/evolution-of-the-wheel-300x85.jpg
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Craig L Russell
> > > > Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> > > > clr@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>



-- 
James Bognar

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