On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Pedro Giffuni <p...@apache.org> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>> Marvin's intervention is very far reaching indeed. It pretty much >> supports the position >>> that there is no such thing as a binary release, and it involves some >> issues that have >>> to be solved before graduation. >>> >> >> Now I think you are getting ahead of yourself. I've shown that the >> IPMC has repeatedly voted on releases that included binaries, and has >> done this recently and without dissent. Three of the most recent 7 >> podlings to have graduated included binaries in their releases. >> > > I am aware of your position that you know better than the IPMC what they > voted for and I will let you discuss your issues with the IPMC members. Do > let us know who wins :). >
I'm not assuming that the IPMC has a consensus view on the topic. We're clearly bringing into focus a long-standing, unresolved issue that transcends AOO. It should probably be escalated to the ASF Board, since there should probably not be a fundamental disconnect between the policy for what TLP's may release versus what Podlings may release. Presumably common sense will arrive at this conclusion before too many more electrons are wasted. > Please note that I don't mean we should stop the graduation process: > a process involves steps and this has to be defined as part of such > process. > I think they are linked, at least in the mind of some IPMC members. Of course, we can still prepare our graduation resolution, etc., and get it ready. Nothing is holding us back on that. -Rob > Pedro.
