juneau-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Juneau 6.2.0-incubating RC1
Date Tue, 25 Apr 2017 00:34:42 GMT
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
>
>

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