>>>Then I'm surprised you chose to do something different and IMO >>>impatience isn't a good enough reason. Yes, my fault.
>>>Sebb indicated that he thought that one of the points he raised was a >>>blocker and although you responded you didn't allow time to see if he >>>agreed with you. Giving a response is not reaching consensus. >>>Sometimes you don't end up agreeing, but you need to allow time to see >>>if its possible. Yes agree also. Thanks for remindering; --Gurkan ________________________________ From: Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> To: general@incubator.apache.org Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 11:25:55 AM Subject: Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release OpenWebBeans M3 On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi Niall; > >>>>The usual process is to allow 72hrs for a vote and not just declare it >>>>when 3 votes are received. Also Sebb raised an issue and IMO its good >>>>etiquette to allow discussions to run their course before declaring a >>>>vote. > >>>>"Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72 hours to >>>>provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate >>>>regardless of their geographic locations." >>>>from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > I have already know those rules!. Then I'm surprised you chose to do something different and IMO impatience isn't a good enough reason. > Besides, I was a bit of rush because of waiting too much to release :) > Otherwise we were not able to release something that our community uses! > >>>>Also Sebb raised an issue and IMO its good >>>>etiquette to allow discussions to run their course before declaring a >>>>vote. > > I responded Sebb explanations. I thought that it may not block this release! Sebb indicated that he thought that one of the points he raised was a blocker and although you responded you didn't allow time to see if he agreed with you. Giving a response is not reaching consensus. Sometimes you don't end up agreeing, but you need to allow time to see if its possible. Niall > If possible I would like to apply Sebb's concerns in next M4 release that we > will try to be perfect :) > > Thanks; > > --Gurkan > > > ________________________________ > From: Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 2:26:57 AM > Subject: Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Release OpenWebBeans M3 > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu > <cgurkanerdo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi; >> >> The [VOTE] is now closed. The [VOTE] to release OpenWebBeans-M3 is >> successful. >> >> There are three +1 binding > > The usual process is to allow 72hrs for a vote and not just declare it > when 3 votes are received. Also Sebb raised an issue and IMO its good > etiquette to allow discussions to run their course before declaring a > vote. > > "Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72 hours to > provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate > regardless of their geographic locations." > from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > "The community then tries to gather consensus on an alternative > proposal that resolves the issue. In the great majority of cases, the > concerns leading to the negative vote can be addressed." > from http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#decision-making > > Niall > >> +1 Votes >> ----------------- >> * Kevan Miller (binding) >> * Matthias Wessendorf (binding) >> * Niall Pemberton (binding) >> >> >> I will add distribution artifacts to the incubator "dist/" place and >> upload to m3-incubator-repository >> >> Thanks to all; >> >> -- Gurkan >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
