Sure, policy is "Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours."
The reasons for the SHOULD have been outlined already and should be well known to anyone who is in a podling since it's core to everything we do. I would have hoped champions would have explained this before even making the proposal. Not that it does any harm to repeat it. Same goes for properly documenting what your +1 means. In the ASF +1 does not mean YES it means yes AND I have done what is necessary (in the case of indicating appropriate due diligence) or yes AND I will help make it happen (in the case of approving an action plan). Again, no harm in repeating this often. It might be useful to give an example of where there is no need for a release vote to go 72 hours. A well run project will seek to have their code in a releasable state at all times. That means reviewing for IP, test coverage, backward compatibility breaks etc. on every commit. In the case of a minor point release or a bug fix release such projects MAY choose to release when 3 +1s are received. After all, if an issue is discovered on the 73rd hour a fix can be committed and a new release voted started immediately without creating additional work for anyone. Ross ________________________________________ From: Justin Mclean <justinmcl...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 3:42 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote Hi, When Ross wrote “72hrs or 3 +1” I think he was using shorthand, not > intending to rewrite foundation policy. > Sure I thought so as well, but other newer people here might not of been aware of it. Thanks, Justin > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
