Hi Stephen. In the Roadmap you have mentioned that all the discussion of particular Jira issue is discussed in ML. I cannot imaging how the code would be discussed here. Why not in pull request at github? In the repository with ASF rights INFRA can create labels like you have proposed "?" or "+1" or milestone "3.5" etc. https://help.github.com/articles/creating-and-editing-labels-for-issues-and-pull-requests/
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Manfred Moser <manf...@simpligility.com> wrote: > I am +100 on that. Thanks for taking the initiative to get things back on > track. > > Manfred > > Stephen Connolly wrote on 2017-01-03 09:40: > > > I believe we have consensus, here is the final call for anyone objecting > to > > the plan to have their opinions considered. > > > > Here is the draft of the proposal for the vote: > > > > NOTE: THIS IS *NOT* THE VOTE > > > > -----BEGIN DRAFT----- > > Hi, > > > > We have collectively managed to mess up our ability to follow the > original > > release plan for 3.4.0 which was originally supposed to consist of an > > effective no-op change of Eclipse's Aether for the code after migration > to > > Apache's Maven Resolver plus some other orthogonal changes around logging > > colourization and launcher script bug fixes. > > > > Given that some developer private builds of the current master branch > have > > been shared with as 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT. More critically, JIRA issues have > been > > closed with a fixed version of 3.4.0. > > > > For us to release a 3.4.0 with those fixes reverted, could cause > confusion > > with our user community. > > > > Additionally the informal practice of keeping existing integration tests > as > > RTC has not been followed, leading to some people to question whether the > > integration tests remain valid. > > > > For all the above reasons it is proposed to do *all* the following as an > > whole: > > > > 1. In git://git.apache.org/maven.git we will rename the current master > > branch to `pre-reset-master` and recreate `master` as (TODO HASH > > corresponding to a commit that does a version bump to 3.5.0-SNAPSHOT on > top > > of 737de43e392fc15a0ce366db98d70aa18b3f6c03 - by having a commit that is > > not on the current master branch it will prevent accidental fast-forward > > commits) > > > > 2. In git://git.apache.org/maven-integration-testing.git we will rename > the > > current master branch to `pre-reset-master` and recreate `master` as > (TODO > > HASH corresponding to a commit on top of 94bd771c88cc96014ca0ddaa07ac6f > > 778b3c7501) > > > > 3. In git://git.apache.org/maven-resolver.git we will rename the current > > master branch to `pre-reset-master` and recreate `master` > > as b74f7a1e8837875b4780199f644119f55d22465d (i.e. the 1.0.x branch) > > > > We will then proceed to have (ideally) the original committers > cherry-pick > > (and tidy up an squash... if the original committers are not able to > assist > > then squashing may not be practicable) those changes that have been > agreed > > for 3.5.0 as summarized on the > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Roadmap+2017 wiki page > > (authorative source of the decisions summarized in the wiki page is the > > mail thread: > > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-dev/201612.mbox/%3CCA% > 2BnPnMxERdjJq5ChMNP-HN_AvZOs8sm7Ud5aVcEza0BPnm5ZOw%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > ). > > > > As this involves a --force push on the `master` branch, we want to get > the > > approval of the committers before continuing. > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > The vote will be decided by a simple majority of valid votes cast. There > is > > no veto. > > > > The vote is open to all committers. > > > > In addition, for the vote to be valid, there must be at least 3x+1 votes > > from PMC members > > > > TODO: insert voting options template > > > > -Stephen > > -----END DRAFT----- > > > > I'm going to start the vote in a clean thread some time tomorrow. Any > > suggested changes will need to be provided before say 12:00 UTC, > > > > If you do not agree that we have consensus (i.e. you are likely to vote > -1) > > please stand up and let us know your concerns so that we may adapt the > plan > > to include your concerns. There is no harm in not liking the current > plan, > > we would rather delay and alter our plan to address your concerns and > have > > the vote thread as a formality rather than the vote thread becoming a > > source of conflict and disharmony in our community. > > > > Before I call the vote I will push the forking changes to maven and > > maven-integration-testing onto a separate branch so that the vote thread > > can include those hashes. I am delaying doing that until tomorrow in case > > there is a change in plan on which hash to base off. > > > > Fun times! > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Cheers Tibor
