cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Clelland <iclell...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Voting on releases
Date Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:04:12 GMT
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:

> On 19/02/2014 12:31, Ian Clelland wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:26 AM, Ross Gardler <
> rgardler@opendirective.com>wrote:
> >
> >> It's unfortunate that there are a couple of -1's on the current release
> >> VOTE thread at a time where the Cordova project is being asked to
> improve
> >> their release processes. So as to avoid a potentially bad experience
> during
> >> this vote I want to ensure the community is aware of the voting
> guidelines
> >> for releases,
> >>
> >> Specifically I want to remind the project that a release is not subject
> to
> >> a veto.
> >
> >
> > Thanks for trying to clarify here, Ross.
> >
> > Does this mean that the vote thread here is absolutely binding? That is,
> if
> > there is no visible trail on the mailing list that anyone has changed
> their
> > minds, and after the allotted period, there are still more +1s than -1s
> > (from PMC members) that the release happens regardless?
>
> No. A release manager is free to cancel the release if they view that
> the issue that triggered the -1 vote(s) is serious enough to do that.
> They are also free to continue and do the release if they wish.
>
> Generally, when I have been the release manager for Tomcat and an RC
> gets a -1 vote I have cancelled the vote/release there and then as
> anything serious enough to trigger a -1 release vote is normally serious
> enough to cancel the release.
>
> I'm fairly sure (although I'd have to check the archives to be sure)
> that I have also proceeded to release anyway after someone votes -1 in
> at least one case. Usually the justification for carrying on is some
> combination of:
> - the issue is not a blocker (e.g. legal , license, etc)
> - the issue exists in the current stable release and no-one has
> complained about it
> - the release fixes an issue in the current stable release that folks
> have been complaining about
> - the issue is minor and can/should be treated like any other bug and
> fixed (probably in the next release)
>
> So the short version: the vote result provides the authority to release
> but does not mandate that the release happens.
>
> HTH,
>

It definitely does, Mark -- thanks.

I wanted to make sure, with a published 24 hour voting window, that we
didn't need to wake everybody who had already voted and convince them to
look at the -1s to prevent an automatic release.

Glad to hear that there's some common sense in the loop :)


> Mark
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message