it's more about us as users than about PMC members (despite my respect ;). Solution #1 would bring confusion I think and might piss off many users.
And what if the PMC vote is negative? One non-apache release 1.3 would be in the wild, available on Rubyforge while some updates would have to be done to prepare a new PMC vote. would you increment the version then? I'd rather consider rubyforge as simple file server, and stick to the apache process. On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Assaf Arkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1. Create all package files, changelog and signature. > > 2. Move those over to a public folder, where we can vote on them. > > 3. Following buildr-dev vote, upload these to RubyForge. > > 4. Following PMC vote, upload these to Apache. > > I really think we should have the PMC vote first. Otherwise you > unnecessarily get into gray area and might piss off some PMC members. > Why take the unnecessary risk? > > Yoav >
