Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Indexer 7.0.2

[Slawomir Jaranowski]

+1

wt., 9 maj 2023 o 11:07 Tamás Cservenák  napisał(a):

> Howdy,
>
> We solved 4 issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317523&version=12352959
>
> There are still some issues in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MINDEXER/issues
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1939/
>
> Source release SHA512:
>
> 473b305e258a99609f96571db2e56aa635b7797aa51ee85309cac833d1825ec9f079b24f4c4da3ea5d4909da66f4651211a6d6e0a0cf989dbe3132a7b202
>
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/maven-indexer-archives/maven-indexer-LATEST/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>


-- 
Sławomir Jaranowski

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Indexer 7.0.2

[Sylwester Lachiewicz]

+1

wt., 9 maj 2023, 11:06 użytkownik Tamás Cservenák 
napisał:

> Howdy,
>
> We solved 4 issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317523&version=12352959
>
> There are still some issues in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MINDEXER/issues
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1939/
>
> Source release SHA512:
>
> 473b305e258a99609f96571db2e56aa635b7797aa51ee85309cac833d1825ec9f079b24f4c4da3ea5d4909da66f4651211a6d6e0a0cf989dbe3132a7b202
>
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/maven-indexer-archives/maven-indexer-LATEST/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Indexer 7.0.2

[Tamás Cservenák]

+1

On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 11:05 AM Tamás Cservenák  wrote:

> Howdy,
>
> We solved 4 issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317523&version=12352959
>
> There are still some issues in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MINDEXER/issues
>
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1939/
>
> Source release SHA512:
>
> 473b305e258a99609f96571db2e56aa635b7797aa51ee85309cac833d1825ec9f079b24f4c4da3ea5d4909da66f4651211a6d6e0a0cf989dbe3132a7b202
>
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/maven-indexer-archives/maven-indexer-LATEST/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Maven Indexer 7.0.2

[Tamás Cservenák]

Howdy,

The vote has passed with the following result:

+1: Slawomir, Sylwester, Tamas

PMC quorum: reached

I will promote the source release zip file to the Apache distribution area
and the artifacts to the central repo.

Thanks
T

[ANN] Maven Indexer 7.0.2 released

[Tamás Cservenák]

Howdy,

the Apache Maven team is pleased to announce the release of the
Maven Indexer 7.0.2

https://maven.apache.org/maven-indexer/

Release Notes - Maven Indexer - Version 7.0.2
** Bug
* [MINDEXER-185] - Document filter doesn't seem to do anything
* [MINDEXER-188] - IndexDataReader can lock up if its threads throw
Exceptions
** Task
* [MINDEXER-186] - Update build plugins
* [MINDEXER-187] - Update dependencies

Have fun,
-The Apache Maven team

[VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Tamás Cservenák]

Howdy,

I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with
ASF guidelines):
CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for at
least 30 days, or more".

Reasoning:
According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
(PMCs + committers).
Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's
disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be able
to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
leave the sleeves alone.

Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.

[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Maxim Solodovnik]

Hello Tamás,

The ASF rule "vote open for at least 72h" only limits lower bound
i.e. the VOTE can't be closed earlier than 72 hours are over but can
last longer :))

On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 16:33, Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
>
> Howdy,
>
> I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with
> ASF guidelines):
> CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for at
> least 30 days, or more".
>
> Reasoning:
> According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> (PMCs + committers).
> Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's
> disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be able
> to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> leave the sleeves alone.
>
> Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1



-- 
Best regards,
Maxim

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Tamás Cservenák]

Howdy Maxim,
yes, I am aware of it, the vote is hence "aligned with ASF process".
I just propose to immediately make it 30 days, that is as you say, in line
with the ASF process :)

Thanks
T

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:37 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
wrote:

> Hello Tamás,
>
> The ASF rule "vote open for at least 72h" only limits lower bound
> i.e. the VOTE can't be closed earlier than 72 hours are over but can
> last longer :))
>
> On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 16:33, Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
> >
> > Howdy,
> >
> > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> with
> > ASF guidelines):
> > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for
> at
> > least 30 days, or more".
> >
> > Reasoning:
> > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> > (PMCs + committers).
> > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> That's
> > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> able
> > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> > leave the sleeves alone.
> >
> > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> >
> > [ ] +1
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -1
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Maxim
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Maxim Solodovnik]

On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 16:39, Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
>
> Howdy Maxim,
> yes, I am aware of it, the vote is hence "aligned with ASF process".
> I just propose to immediately make it 30 days, that is as you say, in line
> with the ASF process :)

It would be sad if all releases will MUST wait for 30 days :(
So you can't do quick release ...

>
> Thanks
> T
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:37 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Tamás,
> >
> > The ASF rule "vote open for at least 72h" only limits lower bound
> > i.e. the VOTE can't be closed earlier than 72 hours are over but can
> > last longer :))
> >
> > On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 16:33, Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
> > >
> > > Howdy,
> > >
> > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> > with
> > > ASF guidelines):
> > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for
> > at
> > > least 30 days, or more".
> > >
> > > Reasoning:
> > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > That's
> > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> > able
> > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > >
> > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1
> > > [ ] +0
> > > [ ] -1
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Maxim
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> >
> >



-- 
Best regards,
Maxim

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it would
be rather negative).
Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
(sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.

That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects and
ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not that
great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it always
had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.

Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes sense
to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/... (thinking
out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).

So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and ask
why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included or
if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to ignore
the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a écrit :

> Howdy,
>
> I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with
> ASF guidelines):
> CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for at
> least 30 days, or more".
>
> Reasoning:
> According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> (PMCs + committers).
> Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's
> disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be able
> to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> leave the sleeves alone.
>
> Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Tamás Cservenák]

Howdy Romain,

So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member of
PMC.
The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting guidelines
will pass.

Thanks
T

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it would
> be rather negative).
> Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
>
> That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
> likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects and
> ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
> think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not that
> great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it always
> had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
>
> Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
> everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes sense
> to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/... (thinking
> out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
>
> So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and ask
> why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included or
> if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to ignore
> the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a écrit
> :
>
> > Howdy,
> >
> > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> with
> > ASF guidelines):
> > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for
> at
> > least 30 days, or more".
> >
> > Reasoning:
> > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> > (PMCs + committers).
> > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> That's
> > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> able
> > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> > leave the sleeves alone.
> >
> > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> >
> > [ ] +1
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -1
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Maxim Solodovnik]

from mobile (sorry for typos ;)


On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák  wrote:

> Howdy Romain,
>
> So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member of
> PMC.
> The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting guidelines
> will pass.
>

To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
And more positive votes than negative

How vote can pass if nobody votes?


> Thanks
> T
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> would
> > be rather negative).
> > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> >
> > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
> > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects and
> > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
> > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not that
> > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> always
> > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> >
> > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
> > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> sense
> > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> (thinking
> > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> >
> > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and
> ask
> > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included or
> > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> ignore
> > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> >
> >
> > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
> écrit
> > :
> >
> > > Howdy,
> > >
> > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> > with
> > > ASF guidelines):
> > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open
> for
> > at
> > > least 30 days, or more".
> > >
> > > Reasoning:
> > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> available
> > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > That's
> > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We
> must
> > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> > able
> > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST.
> And
> > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > >
> > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1
> > > [ ] +0
> > > [ ] -1
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Tamás Cservenák]

Howdy,

Lazy consensus?

Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes :D

T

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:58 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
wrote:

> from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
>
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
>
> > Howdy Romain,
> >
> > So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member
> of
> > PMC.
> > The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> > Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting guidelines
> > will pass.
> >
>
> To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
> And more positive votes than negative
>
> How vote can pass if nobody votes?
>
>
> > Thanks
> > T
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> > would
> > > be rather negative).
> > > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> > >
> > > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
> > > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects
> and
> > > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
> > > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not
> that
> > > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> > always
> > > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> > >
> > > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
> > > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> > sense
> > > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> > (thinking
> > > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> > >
> > > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and
> > ask
> > > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included
> or
> > > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> > ignore
> > > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > >  | Old Blog
> > >  | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
> > écrit
> > > :
> > >
> > > > Howdy,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> > > with
> > > > ASF guidelines):
> > > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open
> > for
> > > at
> > > > least 30 days, or more".
> > > >
> > > > Reasoning:
> > > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> > available
> > > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the
> "doorstep"
> > > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies
> and
> > > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > > That's
> > > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We
> > must
> > > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> > > able
> > > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST.
> > And
> > > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1
> > > > [ ] +0
> > > > [ ] -1
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Well then -1 for the reasons explained (but non binding ;)).

Side note: a vote is more to take a decision, a discuss thread to find one
sounds less rude from my window, in particular since there a real work of
analysis sounds needed.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:53, Tamás Cservenák  a écrit :

> Howdy Romain,
>
> So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member of
> PMC.
> The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting guidelines
> will pass.
>
> Thanks
> T
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> would
> > be rather negative).
> > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> >
> > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
> > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects and
> > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
> > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not that
> > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> always
> > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> >
> > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
> > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> sense
> > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> (thinking
> > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> >
> > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and
> ask
> > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included or
> > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> ignore
> > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> >
> >
> > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
> écrit
> > :
> >
> > > Howdy,
> > >
> > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> > with
> > > ASF guidelines):
> > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open
> for
> > at
> > > least 30 days, or more".
> > >
> > > Reasoning:
> > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> available
> > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > That's
> > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We
> must
> > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> > able
> > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST.
> And
> > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > >
> > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1
> > > [ ] +0
> > > [ ] -1
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Maxim Solodovnik]

On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 17:02, Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
>
> Howdy,
>
> Lazy consensus?
>
> Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
> And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes :D

Makes sense :)))

-1 (non-binding)
IMO there should be chance to make "fast" release :)

>
> T
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:58 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
> wrote:
>
> > from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
> >
> > > Howdy Romain,
> > >
> > > So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member
> > of
> > > PMC.
> > > The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> > > Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting guidelines
> > > will pass.
> > >
> >
> > To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
> > And more positive votes than negative
> >
> > How vote can pass if nobody votes?
> >
> >
> > > Thanks
> > > T
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> > > would
> > > > be rather negative).
> > > > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > > > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> > > >
> > > > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
> > > > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects
> > and
> > > > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
> > > > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not
> > that
> > > > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> > > always
> > > > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> > > >
> > > > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
> > > > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> > > sense
> > > > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> > > (thinking
> > > > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> > > >
> > > > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and
> > > ask
> > > > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included
> > or
> > > > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> > > ignore
> > > > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > >  | Github <
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
> > > écrit
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > Howdy,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> > > > with
> > > > > ASF guidelines):
> > > > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open
> > > for
> > > > at
> > > > > least 30 days, or more".
> > > > >
> > > > > Reasoning:
> > > > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> > > available
> > > > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the
> > "doorstep"
> > > > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies
> > and
> > > > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > > > That's
> > > > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We
> > > must
> > > > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> > > > able
> > > > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST.
> > > And
> > > > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1
> > > > > [ ] +0
> > > > > [ ] -1
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >



-- 
Best regards,
Maxim

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 12:02, Tamás Cservenák  a écrit :

> Howdy,
>
> Lazy consensus?
>

3 days until someone objects ;), should also generally be announced upfront
if done thanks a VOTE thread like this one if it is what you had in mind
otherwise people expect the standard rules to apply and get surprised the
vote passed without sufficient bindings.
On a more personal note, I don't think lazy consensus is ok to change the
voting rules (legally it is but community wide I'm on the other camp but
that's a detail).

So to summarize my view: don't try to abuse our rules to get a quick and
dirty fakish solution but either we try to solve it altogether if we agree
there is an issue or we just keep what we have with its pros and cons.

I'd just like to highlight you also launched "[DISCUSS] Speed up release
process?" thread which was at the opposite of this one and the discussion
led to "3 days is good" so I'm a bit lost with your attempts too and think
you maybe run after a horse I don't understand but which is not the vote
duration.


>
> Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
> And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes :D
>
> T
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:58 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
> wrote:
>
> > from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
> >
> > > Howdy Romain,
> > >
> > > So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member
> > of
> > > PMC.
> > > The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> > > Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting
> guidelines
> > > will pass.
> > >
> >
> > To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
> > And more positive votes than negative
> >
> > How vote can pass if nobody votes?
> >
> >
> > > Thanks
> > > T
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> > > would
> > > > be rather negative).
> > > > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is
> totally
> > > > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > > > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> > > >
> > > > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month,
> will
> > > > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects
> > and
> > > > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend
> to
> > > > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not
> > that
> > > > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> > > always
> > > > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> > > >
> > > > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote
> on
> > > > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> > > sense
> > > > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> > > (thinking
> > > > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> > > >
> > > > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad,
> and
> > > ask
> > > > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more
> included
> > or
> > > > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> > > ignore
> > > > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > >  | Github <
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
> > > écrit
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > Howdy,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in
> line
> > > > with
> > > > > ASF guidelines):
> > > > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote
> open
> > > for
> > > > at
> > > > > least 30 days, or more".
> > > > >
> > > > > Reasoning:
> > > > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> > > available
> > > > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the
> > "doorstep"
> > > > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies
> > and
> > > > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > > > That's
> > > > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt).
> We
> > > must
> > > > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters
> be
> > > > able
> > > > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > > > irrat

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Delany]

Well what is the reason people don't vote? I just think we need to make it
easier to actually test the releases.
My system is setup to vote on plugins that I use. Obviously I don't vote on
plugins I don't use.


  stage
  

  stage

  
  

  staging
  Maven Staging
  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-${stage}/

  
  

  staging-plugin
  Maven Staging
  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-${stage}/

  


./mvn

A maven release is another story. What about
Why I don't vote on some release: because it requires setup.
I'm setup to test new plugins. Shared components is different.


Sounds like you'll be stirring up blocking votes.
If you want more votes in general then I suggest documentation to make it
easier to vote.
For instance, I know how to test a plugin, but not a shared component.
I imagine there actually a few ways to set up my system to make this easier.

On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 12:02, Tamás Cservenák  wrote:

> Howdy,
>
> Lazy consensus?
>
> Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
> And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes :D
>
> T
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:58 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
> wrote:
>
> > from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
> >
> > > Howdy Romain,
> > >
> > > So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member
> > of
> > > PMC.
> > > The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> > > Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting
> guidelines
> > > will pass.
> > >
> >
> > To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
> > And more positive votes than negative
> >
> > How vote can pass if nobody votes?
> >
> >
> > > Thanks
> > > T
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> > > would
> > > > be rather negative).
> > > > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is
> totally
> > > > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > > > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> > > >
> > > > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month,
> will
> > > > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects
> > and
> > > > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend
> to
> > > > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not
> > that
> > > > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> > > always
> > > > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> > > >
> > > > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote
> on
> > > > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> > > sense
> > > > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> > > (thinking
> > > > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> > > >
> > > > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad,
> and
> > > ask
> > > > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more
> included
> > or
> > > > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> > > ignore
> > > > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > >  | Github <
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
> > > écrit
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > Howdy,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in
> line
> > > > with
> > > > > ASF guidelines):
> > > > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote
> open
> > > for
> > > > at
> > > > > least 30 days, or more".
> > > > >
> > > > > Reasoning:
> > > > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> > > available
> > > > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the
> > "doorstep"
> > > > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies
> > and
> > > > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > > > That's
> > > > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt).
> We
> > > must
> > > > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters
> be
> > > > 

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Delany]

Premature send :()
Basically I don't know how to test shared components, so I dont vote on
those.
What about some way to run maven where it only runs to bootstrap another
version of maven? Wrapper could possibly do this.
Delany

On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 12:25, Delany  wrote:

> Well what is the reason people don't vote? I just think we need to make it
> easier to actually test the releases.
> My system is setup to vote on plugins that I use. Obviously I don't vote
> on plugins I don't use.
>
> 
>   stage
>   
> 
>   stage
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   staging
>   Maven Staging
>   
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-${stage}/
> 
>   
>   
> 
>   staging-plugin
>   Maven Staging
>   
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-${stage}/
> 
>   
> 
>
> ./mvn
>
> A maven release is another story. What about
> Why I don't vote on some release: because it requires setup.
> I'm setup to test new plugins. Shared components is different.
>
>
> Sounds like you'll be stirring up blocking votes.
> If you want more votes in general then I suggest documentation to make it
> easier to vote.
> For instance, I know how to test a plugin, but not a shared component.
> I imagine there actually a few ways to set up my system to make this
> easier.
>
> On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 12:02, Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> Lazy consensus?
>>
>> Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
>> And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes
>> :D
>>
>> T
>>
>> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:58 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Howdy Romain,
>> > >
>> > > So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a
>> member
>> > of
>> > > PMC.
>> > > The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
>> > > Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting
>> guidelines
>> > > will pass.
>> > >
>> >
>> > To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
>> > And more positive votes than negative
>> >
>> > How vote can pass if nobody votes?
>> >
>> >
>> > > Thanks
>> > > T
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> > rmannibu...@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
>> > > would
>> > > > be rather negative).
>> > > > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is
>> totally
>> > > > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off
>> day
>> > > > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
>> > > >
>> > > > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month,
>> will
>> > > > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between
>> projects
>> > and
>> > > > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend
>> to
>> > > > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not
>> > that
>> > > > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
>> > > always
>> > > > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
>> > > >
>> > > > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely
>> vote on
>> > > > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
>> > > sense
>> > > > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
>> > > (thinking
>> > > > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
>> > > >
>> > > > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad,
>> and
>> > > ask
>> > > > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more
>> included
>> > or
>> > > > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
>> > > ignore
>> > > > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
>> > > >
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> > > >  | Old Blog
>> > > >  | Github <
>> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > > > LinkedIn  | Book
>> > > > <
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
>> > > écrit
>> > > > :
>> > > >
>> > > > > Howdy,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in
>> line
>> > > > with
>> > > > > ASF guidelines):
>> > > > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote
>> open
>> > > for
>> > > > at
>> > > > > least 30 days, or more".
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Reasoning:
>> > > > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
>> > > available
>> > > > > (PMCs + committers).
>> > > > > Still, multiple re

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Mark Derricutt]

On 12 May 2023, at 22:01, Tamás Cservenák wrote:

> Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
> And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes :D

My vague understanding here - if someone thus wanted to CANCEL the vote, the 
ruling would then still require it to be open for at LEAST 30 days before it 
could be cancelled, and another vote started.

I've not read the full rules for awhile, but does anything preclude concurrent 
open votes?

either way, -1 from me. I'd prefer faster turnarounds.



---
"The ease with which a change can be implemented has no relevance at all to 
whether it is the right change for the (Java) Platform for all time." — 
Mark Reinhold.

Mark Derricutt
http://www.chaliceofblood.net
http://www.theoryinpractice.net
http://twitter.com/talios
http://facebook.com/mderricutt


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Elliotte Rusty Harold]

Honestly 72 hours is a little too little, especially if a weekend is
involved, but 30 days feels way too much, especially if critical bug
fixes or security issues are in play. (Hopefully rare but it does
happen.) Sometimes we have more than one release in 30 days. Maybe 7
days, with some sort of emergency rip cord for critical issues?

-1 on 30 days

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 5:33 AM Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
>
> Howdy,
>
> I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with
> ASF guidelines):
> CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for at
> least 30 days, or more".
>
> Reasoning:
> According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> (PMCs + committers).
> Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's
> disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be able
> to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> leave the sleeves alone.
>
> Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1



-- 
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elh...@ibiblio.org

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Konrad Windszus]

-1 on that proposal.
As said before every release manager can decide to wait longer than 72 hours.
But for some releases (urgent hotfixes) waiting 30 days until pushing it is 
just not acceptable (IMHO).

Konrad

On 2023/05/12 09:31:34 Tamás Cservenák wrote:
> Howdy,
> 
> I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with
> ASF guidelines):
> CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for at
> least 30 days, or more".
> 
> Reasoning:
> According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> (PMCs + committers).
> Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's
> disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be able
> to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> leave the sleeves alone.
> 
> Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> 
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Konrad Windszus]

I don't expect more votes even if increasing the minimum timeframe.
Also what really matters is binding votes, so only PMC members count (which 
brings the number down to < 30).

Konrad

On 2023/05/12 09:31:34 Tamás Cservenák wrote:
> Howdy,
> 
> I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with
> ASF guidelines):
> CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for at
> least 30 days, or more".
> 
> Reasoning:
> According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> (PMCs + committers).
> Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's
> disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be able
> to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> leave the sleeves alone.
> 
> Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> 
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Konrad Windszus]

Not allowed, according to 
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
"the 'minimum quorum of three +1 votes' rule is universal."

On 2023/05/12 10:01:12 Tamás Cservenák wrote:
> Howdy,
> 
> Lazy consensus?
> 
> Again, my main goal is to stir voters up.
> And if unclear, of course I expect negative votes, but I DO EXPECT votes :D
> 
> T
> 
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:58 AM Maxim Solodovnik 
> wrote:
> 
> > from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 12, 2023, 16:53 Tamás Cservenák  wrote:
> >
> > > Howdy Romain,
> > >
> > > So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member
> > of
> > > PMC.
> > > The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> > > Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting guidelines
> > > will pass.
> > >
> >
> > To pass the VOTE needs at least 3 +1
> > And more positive votes than negative
> >
> > How vote can pass if nobody votes?
> >
> >
> > > Thanks
> > > T
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > rmannibu...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it
> > > would
> > > > be rather negative).
> > > > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > > > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> > > >
> > > > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
> > > > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects
> > and
> > > > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
> > > > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not
> > that
> > > > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it
> > > always
> > > > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> > > >
> > > > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
> > > > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes
> > > sense
> > > > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/...
> > > (thinking
> > > > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> > > >
> > > > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and
> > > ask
> > > > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included
> > or
> > > > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to
> > > ignore
> > > > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> > > >  | Old Blog
> > > >  | Github <
> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > LinkedIn  | Book
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a
> > > écrit
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > > Howdy,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> > > > with
> > > > > ASF guidelines):
> > > > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open
> > > for
> > > > at
> > > > > least 30 days, or more".
> > > > >
> > > > > Reasoning:
> > > > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters
> > > available
> > > > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the
> > "doorstep"
> > > > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies
> > and
> > > > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > > > That's
> > > > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We
> > > must
> > > > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> > > > able
> > > > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST.
> > > And
> > > > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1
> > > > > [ ] +0
> > > > > [ ] -1
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Herve Boutemy]

ok, this was just a provocation: I don't have time to play against provocations

I take too much time reading and answering on Slack to track provocations on ML

But if I need to do something to get back on normal attention on ML, IMHO it's 
about stopping taking time on Slack: that'll be my personal choice from now on

Regards,

Hervé

On 2023/05/12 09:51:08 Tamás Cservenák wrote:
> Howdy Romain,
> 
> So here is a catch: this is a completely valid vote started by a member of
> PMC.
> The reason for it is exactly to shake up things a bit.
> Otherwise, if nobody votes, this vote according to ASF voting guidelines
> will pass.
> 
> Thanks
> T
> 
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:43 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Tamas, I don't share the analyzis (and if I would have to vote it would
> > be rather negative).
> > Concretely I don't think "This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > anti-community and disrespectful."  is accurate, less than an off day
> > (sunday) can be but 3 days is generally okish.
> >
> > That said, nobody prevents you to keep a vote running for 1 month, will
> > likely makes it even less interesting, more blocking between projects and
> > ultimately harder to follow for voters from my experience so I tend to
> > think that even if I strongly share the intent, the solution is not that
> > great and does not address the actual issue...in particular cause it always
> > had been allowed by asf to do so, 3 days is a min.
> >
> > Keep in mind maven is a very split ecosystem and you can rarely vote on
> > everything either by knowledge or by time. Ultimately it could makes sense
> > to think to split the community/decrease the number of repos/... (thinking
> > out loud trying to find solution to the issue you describe).
> >
> > So maybe start by a check of the last votes you consider being bad, and ask
> > why people didnt vote and if there is a way to make them more included or
> > if the issue is something else (on a personal side I know I tend to ignore
> > the votes on projects I never use/contribute to for ex).
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau  |  Blog
> >  | Old Blog
> >  | Github <
> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > LinkedIn  | Book
> > <
> > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> > >
> >
> >
> > Le ven. 12 mai 2023 à 11:32, Tamás Cservenák  a écrit
> > :
> >
> > > Howdy,
> > >
> > > I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line
> > with
> > > ASF guidelines):
> > > CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for
> > at
> > > least 30 days, or more".
> > >
> > > Reasoning:
> > > According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> > > (PMCs + committers).
> > > Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> > > only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> > > thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> > > anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled.
> > That's
> > > disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> > > serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be
> > able
> > > to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> > > irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> > > leave the sleeves alone.
> > >
> > > Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
> > >
> > > [ ] +1
> > > [ ] +0
> > > [ ] -1
> > >
> >
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

RE: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Jeremy Landis]

From a real-life perspective, this stuff should remain fast.  People will only 
vote on what they are comfortable with as most others have stated.  But the 
real-life part of it at least as I can speak, it will take months to get some 
of the updates that have been pushed into widespread adoption.  In our usage, 
we rely heavily on the maven wrapper.  It drives through a seeding process to 
pull request it around to repos in say 2k range for us (continuing to upscale). 
 This goes through 'develop' branches, that then takes a while to even 
propagate up from there to release.  Some teams will run hot and fast.  Others 
will push back for years.  We physically have to tell people we will 
intentionally break their builds (ie threats to delete jdk 8 for example), 
raise threats for a while, back off, give another date, etc.  So I don't think 
making any of this move slower would be helpful.  For those that are fast to 
uptake the results (devops leads), they are the ones you really want to focus 
on.  They give the wider tests to prove stuff actually works but typically 
won't even touch until its out.  If people are just forced to vote to vote, you 
won't get any good results and if people are forced to have to figure out how 
to test everything, you won't get any engagement no matter how long it takes.  
There are still others such as myself that while I may or may not agree with 
some changes (thinking maven 3.9.2 warning levels here), I go with it and see 
how it looks after the fact because it does take time to setup and I'd rather 
spend that time scaling it then one off testing it.  Any fallout from there 
just goes back to rework efforts IMO.

Also, IMO, for years maven never ran like this.  It's been bumpy here.  That 
isn't' a problem.  Fail fast, its good.  The overall improvements have been 
grand.  So keep it fast 😉 Too many components to go slow, this isn't the spring 
framework where monthly cadence works.  Save that for maven itself 😉

-Original Message-
From: Tamás Cservenák  
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2023 5:32 AM
To: Maven Developers List 
Subject: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

Howdy,

I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with ASF 
guidelines):
CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for at 
least 30 days, or more".

Reasoning:
According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available (PMCs 
+ committers).
Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and thanks 
to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally anti-community and 
disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's disrespectful for 
sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must serve our project 
community in the best manner, and let our voters be able to cast well thought 
votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the irrationally short window of 
opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And leave the sleeves alone.

Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.

[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1

[VOTE] Release Maven PMD Plugin version 3.21.0

[Michael Osipov]

Hi,

we solved 7 issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317621&version=12352863

There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPMD%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved

Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-pmd-plugin/3.21.0/maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip

Source release checksum(s):
maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
sha512: 
05cf8bf31dd96485f7dc8473e0bc02387c1ec7e39fdbace04bb82167286f6ca1cff14a2623792eb3ef8c426050151244d6d03a3c43fffd9f41024677d4297edf


Staging site:
https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-pmd-plugin-LATEST/

Guide to testing staged releases:
https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html

Vote open for 72 hours.

[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven PMD Plugin version 3.21.0

[Elliotte Rusty Harold]

An external developer contributed a patch for MPMD-371 a few days ago
that seems worth a look before the next release is cut:

https://github.com/apache/maven-pmd-plugin/pull/127

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 4:30 PM Michael Osipov  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> we solved 7 issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317621&version=12352863
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPMD%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
>
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-pmd-plugin/3.21.0/maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
>
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
> sha512:
> 05cf8bf31dd96485f7dc8473e0bc02387c1ec7e39fdbace04bb82167286f6ca1cff14a2623792eb3ef8c426050151244d6d03a3c43fffd9f41024677d4297edf
>
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-pmd-plugin-LATEST/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>


-- 
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elh...@ibiblio.org

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

[VOTE] Release Maven Plugin Tools version 3.9.0

[Michael Osipov]

Hi,

we solved 6 issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317820&version=12353224

There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPLUGIN%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved

Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/org/apache/maven/plugin-tools/maven-plugin-tools/3.9.0/maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip

Source release checksum(s):
maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip
sha512: 
b4cc3345875c80f74fee4a854b80792880719dfbd733fc150c1875d16953a31875e3cec5cde81e196fb13105dd77a770ace720cd2c982dcc8d6c6b99ac12c196


Staging site:
https://maven.apache.org/plugin-tools-archives/plugin-tools-LATEST/

Guide to testing staged releases:
https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html

Vote open for 72 hours.

[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Plugin Tools version 3.9.0

[Tamás Cservenák]

+1

On Fri, May 12, 2023, 23:33 Michael Osipov  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> we solved 6 issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317820&version=12353224
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPLUGIN%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
>
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/org/apache/maven/plugin-tools/maven-plugin-tools/3.9.0/maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip
>
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip
> sha512:
>
> b4cc3345875c80f74fee4a854b80792880719dfbd733fc150c1875d16953a31875e3cec5cde81e196fb13105dd77a770ace720cd2c982dcc8d6c6b99ac12c196
>
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/plugin-tools-archives/plugin-tools-LATEST/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven PMD Plugin version 3.21.0

[Tamás Cservenák]

+1

On Fri, May 12, 2023, 22:30 Michael Osipov  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> we solved 7 issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317621&version=12352863
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPMD%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
>
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-pmd-plugin/3.21.0/maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
>
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
> sha512:
>
> 05cf8bf31dd96485f7dc8473e0bc02387c1ec7e39fdbace04bb82167286f6ca1cff14a2623792eb3ef8c426050151244d6d03a3c43fffd9f41024677d4297edf
>
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-pmd-plugin-LATEST/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven PMD Plugin version 3.21.0

[Michael Osipov]

Am 2023-05-12 um 23:27 schrieb Elliotte Rusty Harold:

An external developer contributed a patch for MPMD-371 a few days ago
that seems worth a look before the next release is cut:

https://github.com/apache/maven-pmd-plugin/pull/127


My objective was only to take care of the reporting mechanics. Nothing 
else. I am not familiar with the rest of the code to make proper 
judgement in a short time.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change to the voting process

[Lee Rhodes]

-1

This is fundamentally a bad idea and is the wrong way to solve the problem
you mention.

If you want people to vote, then work on developing a large enough
community of committers or PMC members that are interested in seeing your
project evolve.  If you are in constant contact with your community, they
will vote.

Don't extend the minimum time that the vote has to be open.  That is a
terrible idea.  Our project as well as many projects need speed and
responsiveness for new features that their communities need and for timely
security fixes.

Regards,

Lee.

On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 11:05 AM Jeremy Landis 
wrote:

> From a real-life perspective, this stuff should remain fast.  People will
> only vote on what they are comfortable with as most others have stated.
> But the real-life part of it at least as I can speak, it will take months
> to get some of the updates that have been pushed into widespread adoption.
> In our usage, we rely heavily on the maven wrapper.  It drives through a
> seeding process to pull request it around to repos in say 2k range for us
> (continuing to upscale).  This goes through 'develop' branches, that then
> takes a while to even propagate up from there to release.  Some teams will
> run hot and fast.  Others will push back for years.  We physically have to
> tell people we will intentionally break their builds (ie threats to delete
> jdk 8 for example), raise threats for a while, back off, give another date,
> etc.  So I don't think making any of this move slower would be helpful.
> For those that are fast to uptake the results (devops leads), they are the
> ones you really want to focus on.  They give the wider tests to prove stuff
> actually works but typically won't even touch until its out.  If people are
> just forced to vote to vote, you won't get any good results and if people
> are forced to have to figure out how to test everything, you won't get any
> engagement no matter how long it takes.  There are still others such as
> myself that while I may or may not agree with some changes (thinking maven
> 3.9.2 warning levels here), I go with it and see how it looks after the
> fact because it does take time to setup and I'd rather spend that time
> scaling it then one off testing it.  Any fallout from there just goes back
> to rework efforts IMO.
>
> Also, IMO, for years maven never ran like this.  It's been bumpy here.
> That isn't' a problem.  Fail fast, its good.  The overall improvements have
> been grand.  So keep it fast 😉 Too many components to go slow, this isn't
> the spring framework where monthly cadence works.  Save that for maven
> itself 😉
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Tamás Cservenák 
> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2023 5:32 AM
> To: Maven Developers List 
> Subject: [VOTE] Change to the voting process
>
> Howdy,
>
> I'd like to propose a change to the ASF Maven voting process (in line with
> ASF guidelines):
> CHANGE the current "vote open for at least 72h" window to "vote open for
> at least 30 days, or more".
>
> Reasoning:
> According to paperwork (ASF stats) we have more than 90 voters available
> (PMCs + committers).
> Still, multiple release votes recently were able to pass the "doorstep"
> only by "hunting down" voters and pulling their sleeves (apologies and
> thanks to them). This makes it clear that ONLY 72h is totally
> anti-community and disrespectful. Nobody's sleeve should be pulled. That's
> disrespectful for sleeves as well (except if you wear a T-shirt). We must
> serve our project community in the best manner, and let our voters be able
> to cast well thought votes in a timely manner, hence increasing the
> irrationally short window of opportunity for casting votes IS A MUST. And
> leave the sleeves alone.
>
> Sorry, but the vote is open for at least 72 hours ONLY.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Plugin Tools version 3.9.0

[Sylwester Lachiewicz]

+1

pt., 12 maj 2023, 23:38 użytkownik Tamás Cservenák 
napisał:

> +1
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023, 23:33 Michael Osipov  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > we solved 6 issues:
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317820&version=12353224
> >
> > There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPLUGIN%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
> >
> > Staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/org/apache/maven/plugin-tools/maven-plugin-tools/3.9.0/maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip
> >
> > Source release checksum(s):
> > maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip
> > sha512:
> >
> >
> b4cc3345875c80f74fee4a854b80792880719dfbd733fc150c1875d16953a31875e3cec5cde81e196fb13105dd77a770ace720cd2c982dcc8d6c6b99ac12c196
> >
> > Staging site:
> > https://maven.apache.org/plugin-tools-archives/plugin-tools-LATEST/
> >
> > Guide to testing staged releases:
> > https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
> >
> > Vote open for 72 hours.
> >
> > [ ] +1
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -1
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven PMD Plugin version 3.21.0

[Sylwester Lachiewicz]

+1

pt., 12 maj 2023, 22:30 użytkownik Michael Osipov 
napisał:

> Hi,
>
> we solved 7 issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317621&version=12352863
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPMD%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
>
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-pmd-plugin/3.21.0/maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
>
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
> sha512:
>
> 05cf8bf31dd96485f7dc8473e0bc02387c1ec7e39fdbace04bb82167286f6ca1cff14a2623792eb3ef8c426050151244d6d03a3c43fffd9f41024677d4297edf
>
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-pmd-plugin-LATEST/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Shared Utils 3.4.2

[Herve Boutemy]

+1

Reproducible Build ok: reference done with JDK 17 on *nix

Regards,

Hervé

On 2023/05/11 21:01:02 Slawomir Jaranowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We solved 2 issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317922&version=12353197
> 
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MSHARED%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20component%20%3D%20maven-shared-utils
> 
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1940/
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1940/org/apache/maven/shared/maven-shared-utils/3.4.2/maven-shared-utils-3.4.2-source-release.zip
> 
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-shared-utils-3.4.2-source-release.zip - SHA-512 :
> 9cd7e2d3cc4409644394acfb200d0a3f022f0890f2bd2bb814591624e5d2d481b308ba96f3903c2a8c02c4a805e6b85b903dd98d51e21768b1cf8b44d5c4b4b6
> 
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/shared-archives/maven-shared-utils-LATEST/
> 
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
> 
> Vote open for at least 72 hours.
> 
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
> 
> -- 
> Sławomir Jaranowski
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Assembly Plugin version 3.6.0

[Herve Boutemy]

+1

Reproducible Build ok: reference done with JDK 17 on *nix

Regards,

Hervé

On 2023/05/11 21:19:01 Slawomir Jaranowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> We solved 18 issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317220&version=12352952
> 
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MASSEMBLY%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
> 
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1941/
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1941/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-assembly-plugin/3.6.0/maven-assembly-plugin-3.6.0-source-release.zip
> 
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-assembly-plugin-3.6.0-source-release.zip - SHA-512 :
> 9a497059010d50a2acf5185d29c3bd31cf6081f0129bf04876dac076a85172d672366928a8a0b1dd9c9020a349b42684a27fe2bbb5cb0e898fa2fb2cec3003be
> 
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-assembly-plugin-LATEST/
> 
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
> 
> Vote open for at least 72 hours.
> 
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
> 
> -- 
> Sławomir Jaranowski
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven PMD Plugin version 3.21.0

[Herve Boutemy]

+1

Reproducible Build ok: reference done with JDK 8 on Windows

Regards,

Hervé

On 2023/05/12 20:30:34 Michael Osipov wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> we solved 7 issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317621&version=12352863
> 
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPMD%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
> 
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1942/org/apache/maven/plugins/maven-pmd-plugin/3.21.0/maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
> 
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-pmd-plugin-3.21.0-source-release.zip
> sha512: 
> 05cf8bf31dd96485f7dc8473e0bc02387c1ec7e39fdbace04bb82167286f6ca1cff14a2623792eb3ef8c426050151244d6d03a3c43fffd9f41024677d4297edf
> 
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-pmd-plugin-LATEST/
> 
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
> 
> Vote open for 72 hours.
> 
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> 
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Plugin Tools version 3.9.0

[Herve Boutemy]

+1

Reproducible Build ok: reference done with JDK 8 on Windows

Regards,

Hervé

On 2023/05/12 21:32:14 Michael Osipov wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> we solved 6 issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317820&version=12353224
> 
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20MPLUGIN%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
> 
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-1943/org/apache/maven/plugin-tools/maven-plugin-tools/3.9.0/maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip
> 
> Source release checksum(s):
> maven-plugin-tools-3.9.0-source-release.zip
> sha512: 
> b4cc3345875c80f74fee4a854b80792880719dfbd733fc150c1875d16953a31875e3cec5cde81e196fb13105dd77a770ace720cd2c982dcc8d6c6b99ac12c196
> 
> Staging site:
> https://maven.apache.org/plugin-tools-archives/plugin-tools-LATEST/
> 
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> https://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
> 
> Vote open for 72 hours.
> 
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> 
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org