On Monday 12 November 2001 09:12 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2001 at 01:48:21AM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > 3) Nobody can veto a release -- showstoppers are merely a tool to make > > everyone aware of a veto on a specific change or a bug that everyone > > agrees must be fixed before a release. > > [ Obviously, you know way more about this than I do, but I would > appreciate any clarification. ] > > My understanding from past conversations on list was that no one > could veto a rolling of a tarball. However, at the same time, > it was mentioned that it was not possible to do a GA release if > there were any outstanding "showstoppers" - as these are in effect, > vetos. The limitation here is not in the actual rolling of the > release (you can't stop that) - just the upper limit on what we > can call it. If it has a showstopper listed in STATUS, my > understanding is that it may not be called GA. Am I wrong?
Yes and no. The whole point of calling something a showstopper is that everybody on list agrees that you can't have a GA release with that bug present. So, it isn't that it is a veto, it is more like an agreement that these issues are too important, and nobody will suggest GA until they are fixed. Ryan ______________________________________________________________ Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------
