Yes Brett :) -Deng
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Brett Porter <[email protected]> wrote: > Deng, are you handling the GA vote since you did the release? > > (And are we agreed to do it as part of the vote in future?) > > On 15/03/2010, at 2:51 PM, Brett Porter wrote: > > > > > On 15/03/2010, at 10:34 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Deng Ching <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Should we label 1.3.6 as a Beta release? > >> > >> Brett suggested having a separate quality vote? I think in the past > >> we've just voted once for release and quality. > > > > I actually prefer it be part of the vote thread itself, or a discussion > before the vote starts - that was just a suggestion since it came up in the > middle of the thread and I didn't want to interrupt it. > > > >> > >> I'm fine with calling it GA and will vote +1 (with reservations). The > >> issues that are bothering me are really too big to change on the > >> branch anyway, they're going to require model changes. > > > > Yep, that's was my understanding as well that got captured in the roadmap > page. > > > >> > >> One option, since it's already been announced as Beta, is to leave it > >> in the wild for a week or so and if no major issues are reported > >> against it we can vote it up to GA quality. > > > > That's fine with me too... > > > >> > >> We really, really, need to get rid of the branch. > > > > +1 > > > > - Brett > > > > -- > > Brett Porter > > [email protected] > > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ > > > > > > > > > > -- > Brett Porter > [email protected] > http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ > > > > >
