Following your argument, if you only +1 releases which are going to be
supported, yet you don't know if any release will be supported, surely you
can only +1 releases you are willing to support?
I think the obligation is at the time of the vote and not a moral obligation
until death. You have an obligation to vote for a release if you, at the
time, intend to help support it in the wild, otherwise you're basically
saying "let it out, and let some other sucker handle the fall out".
----- Original Message -----
From: "Antonio Petrelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Should voting +1 on a release imply that the vote
intends to help support the release?
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
So if you wouldn't +1 for a release with no support, then what do you do
to
ensure support is available before +1ing?
Nothing: in real world, how do you ensure that a volunteer entity works?
Trust, belief that the volunteers are good people, and other beautiful
things. After all, as committers, we all have been invited after
supporting
the community, so we all are *good* people :-)
We are not obliged to work on Struts, we can go away at any time, and we
have not deadlines. So, the *forced obligation* of support seems like a
nonsense to me.
Antonio
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
