incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <>
Subject Re: Release Requirements
Date Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:16:03 GMT
On Oct 12, 2006, at 5:13 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Can we agree that regardless of which style one might prefer the  
> packaging,
> there are multiple valid approaches, and that this level of difference
> should not be a release criteria for the Incubator?

ASF release processes work because people can vote however they want.  
I don't want to create a *rule* that says people that vote can't vote  
in some way for some reason.

> The Mentors can and should engage the community on best practices.   
> When the
> Incubator PMC is presented with a release to approve, we ought to  
> focus on
> actual requirements, such as:
> 	Licensing
> 	Notification
> 	Signing (if we choose to enforce this)
>      ...

The infrastructure team (see mirroring documents) requires release  
signing. It's an ASF-wide thing.

> And what those actual requirements are should be documented so that  
> the
> projects aren't surprised when submitting their request.  If we  
> decide to
> add requirements, we should agree to add them to the release  
> requirements
> document.
> Agreed?

Yes, I like having good documentation to refer to ("-1, go RTFM on  
releases"). As long as the above "should"s remain "should"s in the  
RFC sense (eg not "must"s) I agree.


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

View raw message