Is there anything at stake beyond the version number? If it's called 1.4instead of 1.3.2, does that fully answer the concern?
On 6/19/07, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/19/07, Dion Gillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I believe you're right. > > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/proposal.html#decisions/items/plan says > "...Majority > approval is required before the public release can be made." > > Yes, that is the policy, but I have never seen us move forward with a release with an unresolved -1 in commons. Could be this has happened, but not in the last 4 or so years. It is up to the RM, but with a -1 from a major contributor to the code base, I would personally not push out the release. FWIW, as mentioned on other threads, I agree with Stephen on the version number issue. Phil --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
