On 2/5/2012 12:37 AM, Luciano Resende wrote: > > One thing that is not clear on the proposal is that it says that > releases will be responsibility of the TLPs, but it doest not suggest > or require that the actual existing ASF members that are part of the > TLP have to vote on the release. This might become an issue with > podlings that are not so experienced with the IP issues, etc and > official ASF releases from these podlings might have issues. > > I'd recommend that, during the incubation period of the TLP, releases > are required to have at least 3 votes from existing ASF members. This > might still be a little overhead, but at least it's members of the > PMC, and the TLP would not have to go chase IPMC on the general list > to get release approval.
Here again, this suggests excessive paranoia. We've had broken releases from plenty of TLP's... they do get sorted out over time. It might be worthwhile to require 3 ASF members on the initial release, 2 on the next, 1 on the following and then trust the committee to follow the established precedent. I believe that in the "Incubating Project Requirements and Guidelines" (a different document than the proposal, one that will be created and refined over time, largely the existing incubator docs today to start with) ... projects should earn incremental trust and authority. You've raised one good example. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
