Mailing-List: contact dev-help@corinthia.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5C89C831-8AEC-4E07-ADF1-885BC06675CC@apache.org>
References: <004f01d0d6b1$462f3a00$d28dae00$@acm.org>
	<D93586C1-FD9B-450E-8599-9794B5E07AE4@apache.org>
	<008001d0d6bc$b10fe8f0$132fbad0$@acm.org>
	<5C89C831-8AEC-4E07-ADF1-885BC06675CC@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:39:22 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAK2iWdQeOHtkpz2Z0hGDW3FedH2RL0_O6Hu6nQKmPnnqD6Q7+A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [PRE-VOTE] Release candidate 0.1
From: jan i <jani@apache.org>
To: "dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org" <dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bae46963e2e60051d49c506

--047d7bae46963e2e60051d49c506
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 14 August 2015 at 20:25, Peter Kelly <pmkelly@apache.org> wrote:

> > On 15 Aug 2015, at 1:11 am, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org=
>
> wrote:
> >
> > With regard to what release votes are supposed to reflect, pre-voting
> makes absolutely no sense to me.  The ballots cast should follow a critic=
al
> review of the *specific* release candidate.
> >
> > I have said all I need to say about this.
>
> Maybe voting is not the best term to use for this period. The way I
> understood it was a chance to hammer out last minute issues (like the lin=
e
> ending problem I just mentioned) and once the all the issues I=E2=80=99ve=
 found
> have been sorted out, I give my +1.
>
> Keep in mind that release candidates differ slightly from other things we
> normally vote on, because there=E2=80=99s sometimes obvious technical pro=
blems
> (code not compiling, tests failing) that are not controversial, and are a
> matter of fixing and issuing a new release candidate.
>
> If you have a suggestion for a less ambiguous term we could use so that
> individuals can express the notion that all the problems they have
> found/care about have now been fixed, I would be happy for us to change t=
o
> using that term instead. What is the typical practice on other ASF projec=
ts?
>
Most project I know of, actually call it [VOTE] and use the first part of
the period to find and remove problems. But for obvious reasons, I saw a
need to in our project to divide those 2 periods strongly, so nobody could
be in doubt about what was going on.

We could e.g. easily start [VOTE] and decide the vote runs until 72hours
after the last change, that way anybody who gave an early vote can change
it. However this kind of voting assumes a rather big flexibility among the
voters, but is in no way in conflict with the rules.

I tried to do it so that nobody could be in doubt. And if Dennis do not
understand what PRE-VOTE is, in comparison to [DISCUSS] and [VOTE] he
should just read PRE-VOTE =3D=3D DISCUSS. I did not use DISCUSS because we =
had
that earlier when we decided what the content should be.

Hope that clarifies matters.
rgds
jan i.


rgds
jan i.


>
> =E2=80=94
> Dr Peter M. Kelly
> pmkelly@apache.org
>
> PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key=
>
> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
>
>

--047d7bae46963e2e60051d49c506--