On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:30:20 -0400, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:05:10 -0500, Joe Germuska wrote: > > > > What I do think we've been doing wrong is rushing to vote on a > > release right after it is cut. As I noted before, from the > > framework we've laid out, I would consider it totally normal for us > > to change (upward) the status of a release from test/alpha to beta > > to GA. In fact, I might even say that once we verify that a > > release is not fundamentally flawed, we should have a mandatory > > cooling off period before it would be appropriate to make a vote. > > Something that is mentioned in the HTTP guidelines is that before certifying a > release GA, "... the group has liked to see approximately 48-72 hours of usage in > production to certify that the release is functional in the real world." > > Personally, I think this would be a good guideline for PMC members to follow. If you > vote +1 for GA, it should imply that you are already using the distribution in > production yourself, and have done so for several business days. Of course, a +1 > also implies that you will support the release, as always. >
So now I only get to vote if I have an app in production? Give me a break, Ted. First you hijack the original intent to move to a Tomcat release process and convert it to the HTTPD process instead, and now you want to hijack the voting process as well? -- Martin Cooper > If we don't have the courage to use a distribution in our own work, then we should > not be advising others to do the same :) > > -Ted. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
