On 11/29/2011 7:27 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 11/29/2011 4:00 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
We would like to know if it is OK to either -
1. shorten the release VOTE for change to one non-code file
2. run 72 hour vote in parallel on the dev list as well as on general@
I've never seen a point to 2) to running serial votes. You need only 3
+1's (more +1's than -1's)... usually three mentors are enough to finish
amoung the dev@ list, but announcing the vote (and its conclusion) on the
general@ list seems entirely appropriate. If folks at general@ would
like to have more input on the release, the ppmc dev@ list is really the
best place to get involved.
It is important to always allow 72 full hours. The reason is simple, we
have participants in nearly every timezone, people who are here only on
their own time, and more people who are here almost exclusively on work
hours. 72 hours is long enough to accommodate them all, if they care to
participate.
[... trackpad arguing with me over whether I was done ...]
So as I previously pointed out; *if* the community is already familiar
with the candidate, thoroughly reviewed it for that full 72 hours, then
if the RM replied to "this file is broken" with "I'll fast-track only that
fix and roll a final candidate with a shortened 24 hour final vote" should
put everyone in the frame of mind to review the revised candidate.
But you can't ever shorten the net review time below three days :)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
