Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-corinthia-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-corinthia-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C55D518007 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 69905 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2015 01:07:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-corinthia-dev-archive@corinthia.apache.org Received: (qmail 69873 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2015 01:07:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@corinthia.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 69858 invoked by uid 99); 15 Aug 2015 01:07:26 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:07:26 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E3F5DC20C8 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:07:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.899 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.899 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd4-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-us-west.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JMwifMsIHnE4 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:07:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-f170.google.com (mail-io0-f170.google.com [209.85.223.170]) by mx1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 650F421044 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 2015 01:07:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iods203 with SMTP id s203so101791718iod.0 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:07:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=pO6e+4VNtJ5mjiDklBCulLVTYCITd8NT4sKcnFeXWd8=; b=wMKUKzme74/BeFEk4dBNGCxcVc48/Uynm86YmQUBG1xrMHiyHOkUrfwYGKFIDVuoUT x4dkDcM2ISDXu/aL95Fe6QESbLacU/D99K3eRb87f27bIoxZacxZ9cFv2mTq14swnvqj 3FQ8eQ+EX67mckM/TJv0DE1xJXbXLiG5Im6sPONsf886Nt3iY6n19ZL6V7q6mXrHvhuC MGopEQKoVYxXs+QfZod1yg8OPankIhQdag9V5uKfXl1lHKWL1ildfHXId1jl+jTcrjHp WwQKFliy9kgnacsevVvqaeRvYYHMbyhU6dLtq6OWLVyCWePZFc9zvgiz9nN1EWwPvSsa xP5g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.128.152 with SMTP id k24mr45128740ioi.74.1439600838773; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.107.14.16 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.107.14.16 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:07:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5C89C831-8AEC-4E07-ADF1-885BC06675CC@apache.org> References: <004f01d0d6b1$462f3a00$d28dae00$@acm.org> <008001d0d6bc$b10fe8f0$132fbad0$@acm.org> <5C89C831-8AEC-4E07-ADF1-885BC06675CC@apache.org> Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2015 02:07:18 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [PRE-VOTE] Release candidate 0.1 From: Gabriela Gibson To: dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f8efa9d10a7051d4f3024 --001a113f8efa9d10a7051d4f3024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Not that it matters greatly, but maybe the term "Clearing" for this preparatory process is a good fit. G On 14 Aug 2015 19:25, "Peter Kelly" wrote: > > On 15 Aug 2015, at 1:11 am, Dennis E. Hamilton > 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? > > =E2=80=94 > Dr Peter M. Kelly > pmkelly@apache.org > > PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key > (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966) > > --001a113f8efa9d10a7051d4f3024--