Re: Release vote procedure

What I actually meant (sorry for not writing precisely) is why not call the 72-hour vote now and release it? Cheers, Greg. > On Jan 9, 2016, at 12:39 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > Now that we have a release candidate (YEAH!), we need to sort out how > and when to vote on

Re: Release vote procedure

Remember that a PMC member voting +1 is asserting that they have personally downloaded, built, and tested the release candidate, as well as reviewing its licensing. Do we have three PMC members who can do that within 72 hours? Anybody who would vote -1 on that schedule? (I do not expect to

Re: Release vote procedure

72 hours is a guideline. I think it’s reasonable - that’s what most projects use. But if you think it’s not enough in this case, make it 5 days or 7 days. Whatever. Doesn’t take that long to run the rat reports and see if it builds. The “tested the release candidate” is probably what you’re

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

These are the sorts of issues that I think should be sorted out, on a consensus basis, during a preliminary review-and-test phase. On 1/9/2016 12:16 PM, Greg Trasuk wrote: - I also though we had agreed to take the ‘examples’ folder out of the JTSK. Cheers, Greg On Jan 9, 2016, at 3:05 PM,

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

Happy to help, but I'll be traveling for a few days, so it won't be til the 15th or so before I can have a look at it. If nobody else gets to it first I'll have a go. Greg Trasuk. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.   Original Message   From: Peter Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2016 5:43 PM

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

  I have found that discussing even the simplest changes have become labourious.   I understand that people can be very passionate about Jini.  It's refreshing posting to other projects, attitudes are much more positive and I think that's because those projects have established a clear set of

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

Thanks Greg, much appreciated. Sent from my Samsung device.     Include original message Original message From: tras...@stratuscom.com Sent: 10/01/2016 08:57:18 am To: Peter ; dev@river.apache.org Subject: Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate Happy to help, but 

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

Sorry for this ending up on the list, it was intended to be private discussion, I thought I had edited the To: list appropriately. Greg, I am not saying that you should not review the release candidate. This ended up being a reply in this thread when it should not of. I want and value your

Re: River - 3.0.0 Release candidate

I tend to agree, unfortunately we're not allowed to release anything externally until after the release artifacts have been voted on. On 10/01/2016 12:56 PM, Dan Rollo wrote: Do we have a process for staging the river artifacts in the maven central staging repo? And/or where do the related