> > Do you mean the RM is more qualified than other voting people
for what is regarding legal issues or has more responsibilities on legal
as RM ?
>
> The RM has more at risk as they are
responsible for the release. If for some reason there was a issue with a
release and it was determined that there wasn't the required PMC
oversight (3 +1 valid votes) the RM may not have the legal protection
that the ASF gives. Granted I don't see this happening and the risk is
low but why chance it when it's easily avoided? Plus we need to give
confidence to businesses who use our software.
So, except the "required PMC oversight (3 +1 valid votes)" which is already
described what we apply, there's no more responsibilities in front of Legal for
the RM ?
If yes, I don't see any reasons why the RM would have to decide whatever a vote
can be carried or not (the voter should be trusted that he understand what he
does asking for his vote to be carried), can you tell me what I'm missing ?
Thanks,
Frédéric THOMAS
> Subject: Re: Carried RC Votes
> From: jus...@classsoftware.com
> Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 00:32:32 +1100
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>
> HI,
>
> > Do you mean the RM is more qualified than other voting people for what is
> > regarding legal issues or has more responsibilities on legal as RM ?
>
> The RM has more at risk as they are responsible for the release. If for some
> reason there was a issue with a release and it was determined that there
> wasn't the required PMC oversight (3 +1 valid votes) the RM may not have the
> legal protection that the ASF gives. Granted I don't see this happening and
> the risk is low but why chance it when it's easily avoided? Plus we need to
> give confidence to businesses who use our software.
>
> > It has been stated many times: when there have been no code changes.
>
> It's been stated by several people yes, but I'd like to hear that from Erik
> if you don't mind.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
