Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of garydgregory@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.53 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5703285A-5FB9-4CEE-8D7C-276FBA562E3D@carmanconsulting.com>
References: <20130303132525.0BB2223888CD@eris.apache.org>
	<CAOGo0VazRiJd0NToi218hy+oj+LHWOkm--YP_JG2m5QgTmnZOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPmHmDSOopND9ZPDBNVZ+jdpE7EeDuLR0k3rewqP-z-iEnhfcw@mail.gmail.com>
	<513928C5.8030502@apache.org>
	<CAPmHmDRJZVMg9cAFZhhMCqH-acs3Q5P9H+7p8U2-sj4ODB0voA@mail.gmail.com>
	<5139BA5B.7000703@apache.org>
	<8FF2451C-2D90-41B0-9166-C4A1A5900906@dslextreme.com>
	<CAOGo0VbRgcQj_=1Q-0H1g39frFMW5DcPKzrn9oKaHseeY7ksqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPmHmDTUm46Th2OmOEbnQAVnyDP-GaJzsEhRoP4OW6U+EPVp8A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOGo0Vb4iXaPC90C67WMt2kkp3_=47xjsQSGvrdtsuazrcGMfg@mail.gmail.com>
	<70CBFE8D-740F-4C27-A9AD-B8C5EB65D8E0@carmanconsulting.com>
	<CAOGo0Va=fsu2y_YpFGTj38N1c+Crp1_bBRG21ANdP4katA_4fQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<5703285A-5FB9-4CEE-8D7C-276FBA562E3D@carmanconsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:35:44 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CACZkXPzzym73aPwuOv0A2Qgb4TyaTQek7mj_3t-dhw1CVKFQ-A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [OT] Verifying releases Was: svn commit: r1452037 -
 /commons/proper/beanutils/trunk/src/test/java/org/apache/commons/beanutils/bugs/Jira422TestCase.java
From: Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cdfd68218a74804d7cda578

--000e0cdfd68218a74804d7cda578
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi All:

It seems to me that we are misusing the term veto. A release cannot be
vetoes, it can be VOTEd on with a -1, which is not a veto, but is usually
interpreted as one, by me, at least, as a courtesy to my fellow PMD member
for putting the time in to care.

You can -1 a commit which is not really a veto either because the change as
already happened and requires someone to do the reverting.

So maybe we should not get all hung up on vetoes.

My beef around here is how $%@^ hard to is make publish a release :(

Gary


On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 8:25 AM, James Carman
<jcarman@carmanconsulting.com>wrote:

>
> On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:36 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > In which case, vetoing the commit that causes the problem makes more
> > sense, surely?
> >
>
> Perhaps we should set up a Sonar rule to catch stuff like this to save you
> the trouble of trolling the SVN commit log messages.
>
> The veto was unnecessary.  It's a wonder we keep any committers around
> here.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

--000e0cdfd68218a74804d7cda578--