When I say "binding votes" isn't a thing, I just mean it's more helpful to think of "vote" as the thing (noun) and "binding" and "non-binding" as qualifiers (adjectives), rather than thinking of "binding vote" and "non-binding vote" as compound nouns. It's more useful to think of them as noun clauses (containing an adjective and a noun) instead.
Nouns operate on definitions, so thinking about these as compound nouns, you still have to figure out the definition (nominative thinking). If, on the other hand, you think of it as a noun clause, the work of figuring out the definition is made easier by understanding the quality the adjective is providing to the noun (descriptive thinking). "binding" is just as an adjective that means the "vote" counts in achieving the majority, and "non-binding" means it doesn't count in achieving a majority. Only PMC votes count (i.e. are binding). Much of this confusion I think stems from English being a terrible language to use, especially in writing. In English, the line between a noun clause and a compound noun is very blurry. The main difference seems to be how we perceive them (nominative thinking vs. descriptive thinking), rather than strict grammar rules. Sorry if this sounds like an English lecture. I'm just trying to be clear and helpful in interpreting the ASF requirements for voting on releases. Another way of viewing this is: 1. PMCs are part of the official legal structure of the Foundation, 2. Approving a "release" is an official act of the Foundation, 3. non-PMC members can't officially approve a release, because they are not part of the official legal structure to do so. (see also https://www.apache.org/foundation/governance/pmcs ; that page also specifically says that the minimum number of PMC members on a project is 3, because that is the minimum number needed to approve a release) On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 3:24 AM Jens Geyer <jensge...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Well, we definitely have "binding votes" as a term. So is there a better > name for it? Other votes? Unbinding? Less binding? Theoretically binding? > Community feedback? > > *confused* > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > From: Christopher > Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 9:34 PM > To: dev@thrift.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Apache Thrift 0.14.0-rc0 release candidate > > The votes only count if they are from PMC members. There's no such > thing as a "non-binding" vote. It's just a way of people expressing > the fact that they thought it was okay, even though they don't have a > vote. > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 3:19 PM Duru Can Celasun <dcela...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > Hey all, > > > > Maybe I'm reading that page wrong, but I think the vote is good. It says > > "minimum three positive votes" are required, it doesn't say they have to > > be binding. My understanding is that PMC members can choose to count or > > not count non-binding votes. > > > > So if we do count Yuxuan's vote (we should) we can go ahead with the > > release. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > On Wed, 10 Feb 2021, at 20:04, Jens Geyer wrote: > > > All, > > > > > > Including my own vote of +1 we have 2 binding +1. > > > Additionally, we received one non-binding +1. > > > No -1 votes have been cast. > > > > > > Binding Votes > > > +1 Jens Geyer > > > +1 Duru Can Celasun > > > > > > Non-binding votes > > > +1 Yuxuan Wang > > > > > > According to the ASF trelease policy, the vote for the Apache Thrift > > > 0.14.0 > > > release is NOT successful, because we did not reach the minimum required > > > amount of positive binding votes. > > > > > > http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval > > > http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#approving-a-release > > > > > > Thank you to all who helped test and verify. > > > > > > JensG > > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > From: Jens Geyer > > > Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 12:52 AM > > > To: Thrift-Dev > > > Subject: [VOTE] Apache Thrift 0.14.0-rc0 release candidate > > > > > > All, > > > > > > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the official > > > Apache Thrift 0.14.0 release: > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/thrift/0.14.0-rc0/thrift-0.14.0.tar.gz > > > > > > The release candidate was created from the release/0.14.0 branch and can > > > be > > > cloned using: > > > > > > git clone -b release/0.14.0 https://github.com/apache/thrift.git > > > > > > The release candidates GPG signature can be found at: > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/thrift/0.14.0-rc0/thrift-0.14.0.tar.gz.asc > > > > > > The release candidates checksums are: > > > md5: 53a61cd60ff2f06d3102e1bf6dd62b37 > > > sha1: ced3c99bede66e27daff7bd097adc329ff3682b9 > > > sha256: 8dcb64f63126522e1a3fd65bf6e5839bc3d3f1e13eb514ce0c2057c9b898ff71 > > > > > > > > > A prebuilt statically-linked Windows compiler is available at: > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/thrift/0.14.0-rc0/thrift-0.14.0.exe > > > > > > Prebuilt statically-linked Windows compiler GPG signature: > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/thrift/0.14.0-rc0/thrift-0.14.0.exe.asc > > > > > > Prebuilt statically-linked Windows compiler checksums are: > > > md5: 28ff1f363ead1f4c11485cef9c2ac696 > > > sha1: 078001bcd4ac6d179c2d09a0323eb5fc9bc5bb78 > > > sha256: 2630d039d3548db9eae70f7cd76ace0672f8535ef0021b9ad02205ed63d3f204 > > > > > > > > > The CHANGES list for this release is available at: > > > https://github.com/apache/thrift/blob/release/0.14.0/CHANGES.md > > > > > > > > > Please download, verify sig/sum, install and test the libraries and > > > languages of your choice. > > > > > > This vote will close in 114 hours on 2021-02-09 18:00 UTC, giving enough > > > room for everybody even with a weekend in between. > > > > > > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Thrift 0.14.0 > > > [ ] +0 > > > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Thrift 0.14.0 because... > > > > > > https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20210209T1800&p0=1440 > > > > > > Have fun, > > > JensG > > > > > > >
