I'll take the blame for causing any confusion on this one since I had
committed these Javadoc changes "during" the vote, which was made more
difficult due to the extremely long email delays caused by the current batch
of viruses going 'round.
My thought was that we were indeed voting on the build based on tagged
sources and that any new commits would be in a post >2.0 release (even
though, these changes being Javadoc changes are "harmless" and beneficial to
the release IMHO ;-)
If we want to implement a code freeze in our environment on top of using tags, we could do that. I guess we'd have to vote on it too :-)
Sorry if I misunderstood things. I thought we were still adding things to the release. I see no reason to freeze code if we have a tagged release. I am +1 for releasing the code prior to the javadoc changes that occurred during the vote or to adding them and retagging. If that requires a new vote, then I am OK with that as well.
In any case, we should not have to stop everything as we wait for the release to go. I would also very much like to see 2.0 get out the door.
Phil
Gary
-----Original Message----- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 00:00 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
Well, if there is a question about policy/process, why not just freeze
the
code and restart the vote?
By tagging the CVS, he effectively has frozen the code for the Release. I was simply curious about the policy because, as I said, other projects are stricter. For example the HTTPd team has different rules (http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html).
A Release Manager makes a release build, and it is automatically an alpha. It becomes a beta release when at least three Committers have voted beta status, and there are more +1 than -1. It becomes a GA release when at least three Committers vote for GA (stable) status, and there are more +1 than -1. Notice that -1 is not a veto. Notice, also, that the package itself may go through multiple status changes, but no packaging changes. The only allowable change is renaming the file to reflect the change in status; exceptions can be made if a change in the contents of the tarball (e.g., someone forgot to add the LICENSE file). Otherwise, if a change in the CVS needs to be incorporated, it becomes a new release (with a new vote).
Other projects, such as Avalon, also roll jars and then vote on them as a Release. So I was just asking to understand what is established as policy here. I wasn't challenging Henri's release.
--- Noel
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
