> On Oct 18, 2017, at 4:45 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>
>
>
>> Maybe we need to ask for review of
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval at the same
>> time as looking at the voting process documentation. If taken literally, a
>> PMC member who cannot do builds from
Maybe we need to ask for review of
http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval at
the same time as looking at the voting process documentation. If taken
literally, a PMC member who cannot do builds from source can't cast a
+1 vote, because their vote is binding and a bin
On 10/18/2017 07:18 PM, Gavin McDonald wrote:
On 19 Oct 2017, at 9:39 am, Carl Marcum wrote:
Question..
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding whether
stated explicitly or not?
Yes,
Gav…
Thanks Gavin !!
-
On 10/18/2017 07:21 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Carl Marcum wrote:
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding
whether stated explicitly or not?
Yes, it should. People add "binding" as a shorthand to mean "I am from
the PMC" since a release cannot be approved without rea
On 10/18/2017 07:16 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 10/18/2017 3:39 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
Question..
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding
whether stated explicitly or not?
The vote counting is really only for ASF rule conformance. The way it
really works fo
Carl Marcum wrote:
If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding
whether stated explicitly or not?
Yes, it should. People add "binding" as a shorthand to mean "I am from
the PMC" since a release cannot be approved without reaching 3 votes
from the PMC, and it must be easy
> On 19 Oct 2017, at 9:39 am, Carl Marcum wrote:
>
>
> Question..
> If a PMC member cast a vote should it always be counted as binding whether
> stated explicitly or not?
Yes,
Gav…
>
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubs
On 10/18/2017 3:39 PM, Carl Marcum wrote:
On 10/18/2017 03:11 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
We expect PMC members to have a deep sense of responsibility
to their projects. When they cast a binding vote, we trust that
they have satisfied themselves enough to warrant them casting
the vote. That, alon
On 10/18/2017 03:11 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
We expect PMC members to have a deep sense of responsibility
to their projects. When they cast a binding vote, we trust that
they have satisfied themselves enough to warrant them casting
the vote. That, alone, should be sufficient, imo.
--
Hi Dave, all
I proposed the following new logic on the comdev mailing list.
Who is permitted to vote is, to some extent, a community-specific
thing. However, the basic rule is that only PMC members have binding
votes, and all other votes are advisory.
Much better with exactly the same meani
So the practice is much saner than the theory and nobody discarded
Larry's -1 saying it was not coming from a PMC member. Any correctly
justified -1 will of course be treated in the same way, regardless of
who casts it.
I'm aware of that. That is exactly why I applauded AOO's PMC members
at
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 3:12 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>
> On 10/18/2017 12:28 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>> On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>>> This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too much...
>>> I mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of what
On 10/18/2017 12:28 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too
much... I mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of what
they did to justify their +1. But this shouldn't be used "against" the
Pedro Lino wrote:
I agree that it is good that some users replicate the building procedure
and confirm that it works. ...
In any case I couldn't find that particular requirement for a PMC member
in the voting page (https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html).
Maybe that is being too strict?
Hi Pedro,
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 1:35 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>
> Hi Dave, all
>
>> (1) PMC members have a higher bar for their vote. I did not vote at all
>> because I did not build from source etc.
>
> I agree that it is good that some users replicate the building procedure and
> confirm that
Am 18.10.2017 um 22:35 schrieb Pedro Lino:
Hi Dave, all
(1) PMC members have a higher bar for their vote. I did not vote at
all because I did not build from source etc.
I agree that it is good that some users replicate the building procedure
and confirm that it works.
Replicability is a goo
Hi Dave, all
(1) PMC members have a higher bar for their vote. I did not vote at all because
I did not build from source etc.
I agree that it is good that some users replicate the building procedure
and confirm that it works.
Replicability is a good measure of transparency and quality.
In a
Hi Pedro,
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 12:28 PM, Pedro Lino wrote:
>
> On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
>> This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too much... I
>> mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of what they did to
>> justify their +1. But th
On 18/10/2017 19:02, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too
much... I mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of what
they did to justify their +1. But this shouldn't be used "against" them.
+1 (as a user)
ASF does a hell of a j
We expect PMC members to have a deep sense of responsibility
to their projects. When they cast a binding vote, we trust that
they have satisfied themselves enough to warrant them casting
the vote. That, alone, should be sufficient, imo.
-
2017-10-18 20:02 GMT+02:00 Andrea Pescetti :
> Keith N. McKenna wrote:
>
>> Even though he is a PMC member his vote cannot be counted as binding as
>> he did not build from source as is required by Apache Policy.
>>
>
> This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too much...
> I
Keith N. McKenna wrote:
Even though he is a PMC member his vote cannot be counted as binding as
he did not build from source as is required by Apache Policy.
This is OK as long as the Apache Policy doesn't get in the way too
much... I mean, I highly appreciate when people provide a list of wha
On 10/18/2017 09:29 AM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
On 10/18/2017 11:49 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
Kazunari Hirano (khirano) is on the Apache OpenOffice PMC so his vote
should be included in "binding" .
MzK
"Only the truth will save you now."
-- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"
On Oct 1
On 10/18/2017 11:49 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> Kazunari Hirano (khirano) is on the Apache OpenOffice PMC so his vote
> should be included in "binding" .
>
>
> MzK
>
> "Only the truth will save you now."
> -- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"
>
>
>
> On Oct 17, 2017 18:09, "Carl Marcum"
Ah. Will do.
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 12:16 PM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Am 18.10.2017 um 18:09 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>> I've updated the Bugz entry w/ the background.
>
> I was thinking of:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/4.1.4/unxmacos/
>
> Matthias
>
Am 18.10.2017 um 18:09 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
> I've updated the Bugz entry w/ the background.
I was thinking of:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/devtools/build-scripts/4.1.4/unxmacos/
Matthias
>
>> On Oct 18, 2017, at 11:57 AM, Matthias Seidel
>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 17.10.2017 um 16:4
I've updated the Bugz entry w/ the background.
> On Oct 18, 2017, at 11:57 AM, Matthias Seidel
> wrote:
>
> Am 17.10.2017 um 16:46 schrieb Peter kovacs:
>> Cool!
>>
>> Can you write shortly which files you have changed (or the svn revision
>> number)? I would like to understand and learn. Tha
Am 17.10.2017 um 16:46 schrieb Peter kovacs:
> Cool!
>
> Can you write shortly which files you have changed (or the svn revision
> number)? I would like to understand and learn. Thanks!
Only the build script was changed, no files in source...
@Jim:
Could you update the build script/log in our SV
Kazunari Hirano (khirano) is on the Apache OpenOffice PMC so his vote
should be included in "binding" .
MzK
"Only the truth will save you now."
-- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"
On Oct 17, 2017 18:09, "Carl Marcum" wrote:
Voting Results
+1: 13
0: 0
-1: 0
+1 (non-binding)
Kei
29 matches
Mail list logo