Hi Alexandre, from a formal point of view: I guess, that you are still in a "pending" state, so everything is ok (no need to re-cast, etc.).
I just asked our PMC chair to formally provide you with the information you need for your ASF id, CLA etc. Gruß Richard Am Montag, dem 07.08.2023 um 08:44 +0200 schrieb Alexandre Vermeerbergen: > Hello, > > Ah sorry: I indeed accepted Richard's invitation to join as a PMC, > but I > thought I had to wait for some formal confirmation before I could > cast a > binding vote - hence my mention as "non-binding " with my vote. > > Should I recast it, or I am right to wait for some formal annouce of > my PMC > status? > > Alexandre > > > > Le sam. 5 août 2023, 19:16, Richard Zowalla <rich...@zowalla.com> a > écrit : > > > Hey Bipin, > > > > think it is sufficient, if you put your own +1 to the original > > thread. > > Given that Alexandre has also accepted his invitation, we should be > > good > > now. > > > > Thanks for doing the release! > > > > Gruß > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > Am 5. August 2023 19:09:40 MESZ schrieb Bipin Prasad < > > bipinpra...@apache.org>: > > > Richard, > > > Thanks for this note on the vote process. I will ask for > > > further > > votes on the to ensure compliance - even though RC4 was moved to > > release > > area. Will send out an email with the new locations. Once an > > additional > > vote is registered, I will send out the vote result email. > > > > > > --Bipin > > > > > > On 2023/08/04 20:05:35 Richard Zowalla wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > During the last release vote, I noticed the following things > > > > that we > > > > should do better next time to adhere to the ASF release > > > > guidelines > > > > [1,2,3]: > > > > > > > > - We need at least 3 (binding) votes for a release. A binding > > > > vote > > > > originates from PMC members only (although community is > > > > encouraged to > > > > also cast non-binding votes and test the binaries). For 2.5.0, > > > > we only > > > > had 2 (binding) votes for RC4 and an implicit one (at least I > > > > assume > > > > it) by our release manager, which would need to be cast next > > > > time, so > > > > we can formally do the release according to the foundation's > > > > policies. > > > > > > > > - A successful vote should be followed by a [VOTE] [RESULT] > > > > mail to > > > > indicate, that the vote was successful and the release process > > > > continues. > > > > > > > > - If multiple RC's are needed to do a release, we would need to > > > > sent a > > > > mail with [VOTE] [CANCELLED] to indicate the failed attempt and > > > > start a > > > > new mail thread with the next release candidate. This make the > > > > process > > > > more transparent to everyone. > > > > > > > > No blaming, just my observation. I think, that we can do better > > > > next > > > > time :) > > > > > > > > Gruß > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > [1] https://infra.apache.org/release-publishing.html > > > > [2] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html > > > > [3] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > > > > >
