William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>> The current tally is extremely close (9 +1 vs. 8 -1 binding)
>>> I don't want to close an issue with such a small margin.
>> I suggest that we should not change policy on anything like this lack of
>> concensus. I do, however, suggest that pressure be put on Maven to
>> enforce signing.
> As no-maven still hasn't been justified, and when we authorized releases
> we had not explicitly called out specific channels, so I'm wondering what
> the "change" you refer to actually is :)
Right now, the policy has been an Incubator-specific repository, not the main
one.
And the general statement is that when we have an issue with no clear
consensus, we should take care about making changes on slim margins.
> the only two incubator specific answers I've seen are "because we want
> incentive for projects to graduate"
That's not mine.
> and "because users will come to rely on incubating project artifacts"
> which is an issue with the developer who creates the dependency to an
> -incubating' artifact, and disclaimer to the consumer is that
> developer's issue.
We have a long standing policy that users should have to make a conscious
decision to use Incubator artifacts, regardless of build tool.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
