On Mar 19, 2014, at 10:48 AM, sebb wrote:
On 19 March 2014 15:05, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
what has been with the rule that an ipmc must forward the VOTE to the
incubator pmc when it gets started, and those members can also cast a
binding -1 ?
IPMC votes are the only ones that are binding.
However, even a binding -1 vote is not a veto - it is just a negative vote.
But IMO it would be foolish for an RM to ignore a -1 vote.
In PMCs that have been established some time, IME the expectation is
that the RM will cancel the vote if the -1 appears to be justified.
This means that PMC members who have already voted probably won't
revote as a -1 even if they agree with the -1 (perhaps they overlooked
that issue - not everyone can check every aspect of a release).
If there is some doubt as to whether the -1 should really block the
release, IMO the RM should follow up to explain why they think it is
not a blocker.
So either way, the -1 is resolved before the release proceeds.
Those projects are being foolish. If something bad is found that
others also think is bad, they should change their vote to -1.
Relying on the RM to make a decision like that just means they
don't care and a good RM will go ahead and release based on the
majority vote.
There are also plenty of valid reasons for a -1 on a release that
will occur frequently. The most common one is I have just one more
change I want to get in The less common one is I'll keep voting
-1 on the release until you drop your veto on my favorite change.
There are no vetos on releases. That is not an accident.
Releases are majority decisions, as in a majority of folks on the
PMC think that moving forward with X is better than waiting for Y.
That's what the PMC has been empowered by the Board to decide.
Roy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
