I think it makes sense to capture the feedback as individual issues (and some have already been filed, e.g. GEODE-27 for pom correctness). Not all the comments are release blockers and thus can be addressed over time. Let’s wait for the discussion to complete so we can reach consensus around next steps.
Anthony > On Jan 20, 2016, at 12:45 PM, Nitin Lamba <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sorry have been away from my e-mails. > > @Roman, Greg, Mike: Yes, first time miss. Didn't see a timing guideline but > now we know! It makes sense to wait until Friday, and ask for 72 hrs on the > next RC VOTE. > > @Niall: Thanks a lot for your feedback! NOTICE and LICENSE files was somewhat > of a known issue given the first release (GEODE-610). Your e-mail capture the > gaps well. We'll start working on it. > > @Anthony: we should capture the gaps on JIRA - I'll create a few top-level > issues (Files, Build/ Gradle and Maven), and have the details captured as > subtasks. Suggestions? > > Have a broader question: Given that most of the findings so far are related > to license text/ config files not code or bugs, does it mean that we'll have > another RC (#2) cut from the same (1.0.0-incubating.M1) branch? Will wait > until end of the week to capture all the feedback. > > Thanks, > Nitin > > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Roman > Shaposhnik <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 11:13 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode (Incubating) first Milestone release - > v1.0.0-incubating.M1 > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Michael Stolz <[email protected]> wrote: >> What caused it to have such a short deadline? Did we do something to cause >> it to be so short or is that the default and we just didn't know to >> override it somehow? > > That's a good question for a release manager. Nitin? > > Thanks, > Roman. > > P.S. If I were to make a guess I'd say this is just because everybody's > so excited to get the first set of bits out ;-)
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
