Also note this page:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
In particular the voting for releases section.
Votes on Package Releases
Votes on whether a package is ready to be released follow a format
similar to majority approval -- except that the decision is officially
determined solely by whether at least three +1 votes were registered.
Releases may not be vetoed. Generally the community will table the
vote to release if anyone identifies serious problems, but in most
cases the ultimate decision, once three or more positive votes have
been garnered, lies with the individual serving as release manager.
The specifics of the process may vary from project to project, but the
'minimum of three +1 votes' rule is universal.
Michael
On Jan 15, 2010, at 5:46 PM, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote:
We CAN NOT use lazy consensus for releases (and we should have made it
more clear that the project had not voted on the RCs when announcing
them on the users@ list).
ASF Release Policy requires three +1 votes from people who have
*installed and tested* the software.
Would everyone please read the ASF release policy (in particular the
"What is a release?" and "Release Management Questions" sections)
before
cutting any more tarballs:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
Regards,
Daryl
On 15/01/2010 4:26 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Fyi it's a holiday weekend in the US. Using lazy concensus now
might be better done starting sunday or monday.
--- Original Message ---
From:Justin Mason <[email protected]>
Sent:Fri 1/15/10 3:45 pm
To:Warren Togami <[email protected]>
Cc:Justin Mason <[email protected]>,SpamAssassin Dev <[email protected]
>
Subj:Re: PROPOSED 3.3.0-rc3
On Friday, January 15, 2010, Warren Togami <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 01/15/2010 11:13 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
-1
Even though my rc3 was unofficial, it is entirely uncool from
packager
perspective to reuse names. Names are meaningless and cheap. This
should
have been named rc4.
Furthermore I am unconvinced that we should change the "use bytes"
thing
at this last minute. It has been going on since early 3.2.x and
we're
fixing it only at the last moment before 3.3.0? This seems unsafe.
Could someone provide a sample message that takes an obscene
amount of
time?
Warren
Furthermore, what is releasing an official rc3 at this point going
to gain us, especially if it will take 3 days to become an
official release?
BTW I think I need to clarify. ANY release will take 3 days from
tarball cutting to become an official release -- 72 hours to provide
time for -1 votes. That is ASF protocol on releases.
