Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 53657 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2007 13:03:58 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Aug 2007 13:03:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 61808 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2007 13:03:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 61761 invoked by uid 500); 30 Aug 2007 13:03:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 61746 invoked by uid 99); 30 Aug 2007 13:03:53 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:03:53 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of akarasulu@gmail.com designates 209.85.132.248 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.132.248] (HELO an-out-0708.google.com) (209.85.132.248) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:03:46 +0000 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c31so104354ana for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:03:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=NpBHwAhmXnDbRJox0fV4OJL163GCALO1FwByES/trsOQyHjT6dkf1OoIevQYZUsrTKOnCbJuSuUHiL0U9P3PIaCeDg/B764UPLxjMB9ajruksHImrLAQq1HrZLpgFBZMlTEBOF+baXng2J90edJEnyKTRv//oJA/G8SlCxerJpg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=XprlSyS9nfTVholMWiegvHnDyqQ14po5+c8bHfywXOyTuMpAOi2qZBM2/zGkKIxoB8k8+kGINeQJxYJKST/lqQDrMcXfmj+cytLl3Kn47oMqZXou/caVKaUA/H1ZxY2sYNCYKpqtG385Uja9JXEwOk7K6BzcC6oKwEQuoANF4UA= Received: by 10.142.212.19 with SMTP id k19mr19604wfg.1188479005363; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.101.21 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:03:25 -0400 From: "Alex Karasulu" Sender: akarasulu@gmail.com To: "Apache Directory Developers List" , elecharny@iktek.com Subject: Re: [ApacheDS][Release] Requesting that PMC consider expedited 36 hr vote for 1.5.1 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6093_24882650.1188479005241" References: X-Google-Sender-Auth: e279d7c53fb1f7c3 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_6093_24882650.1188479005241 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline +1 Alex On 8/30/07, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > > I +1 this proposal. > > We are now so close to the Ldap cponference that we need to move fast, > mainly due to travel time of two of our majors committers (Alex and > Chris) > > thanks Alex ! > > On 8/30/07, Alex Karasulu wrote: > > Hi PMC, > > > > NOTE: I put this out there on the dev list purposely so all can see. > > > > This is a special request to the PMC to keep the voting period down to > 36 > > hrs instead of > > 72 for the 1.5.1 release. It is an exceptional condition and this is > not > > something we will get > > into a habit of doing. I am asking this for several reasons: > > > > o We have a tight release schedule > > o Most of us will be traveling and need a quick conclusion to the vote > so > > we may be present to > > release the artifacts properly > > o If there is a blip that requires fixes followed by another release > vote, > > then we will still have a > > chance at making this all happen in time for LDAP con. > > o This is a feature introduction release (NOT a production release) > > o Most of the binding voters are going to be release artifact testers > who > > are diligently testing > > installers, servers and apps as we speak: so waiting on them to tes= t > the > > goods is not an > > issue. > > > > Can we get a majority of the PMC to quickly +1 (approve) this request? > > > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel L=E9charny > www.iktek.com > ------=_Part_6093_24882650.1188479005241 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline +1

Alex

On 8/30/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
I +1 this proposal.

We are now so close to the Ldap cponference that= we need to move fast,
mainly due to travel time of two of our majors co= mmitters (Alex and
Chris)

thanks Alex !

On 8/30/07, Alex K= arasulu < akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:=
> Hi PMC,
>
> NOTE: I put this out there on the dev list= purposely so all can see.
>
> This is a special request to the= PMC to keep the voting period down to 36
> hrs instead of
> 72 for the 1.5.1 release.  It is = an exceptional condition and this is not
> something we will get
&= gt; into a habit of doing. I am asking this for several reasons:
>>  o We have a tight release schedule
>  o Most of us will be traveling and need a quick conclus= ion to the vote so
> we may be present to
>   &n= bsp; release the artifacts properly
>  o If there is a blip= that requires fixes followed by another release vote,
> then we will still have a
>     chance a= t making this all happen in time for LDAP con.
>  o This is= a feature introduction release (NOT a production release)
> &nb= sp;o Most of the binding voters are going to be release artifact testers wh= o
> are diligently testing
>     installers,= servers and apps as we speak: so waiting on them to test the
> goods= is not an
>     issue.
>
> Can we ge= t a majority of the PMC to quickly +1 (approve) this request?
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>


--
Regards,
= Cordialement,
Emmanuel L=E9charny
ww= w.iktek.com

------=_Part_6093_24882650.1188479005241--