directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Release JUnit Add-ons 0.1 - take 2
Date Wed, 09 Feb 2011 15:58:53 GMT
hint: put junit-addons into shared, kick off vote on shared 1.0-m1
release, avoid 2 72 hour periods.

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/9/11 4:34 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Stefan Seelmann<seelmann@apache.org>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi devs,
>>>
>>> I'd like to release the first version of our JUnit Add-ons.
>>>
>>> The JUnit Add-ons contain helpers for concurrent unit test that are
>>> used only internally.
>>>
>>> Please note that it includes source files copied from [3], licensed
>>> under ALv2. According to [4] the original copyright notice and license
>>> header is unchanged. Attribution has been added to NOTICE and LICENSE
>>> file.
>>>
>>> The tag can be found at [1], the staging repository can be found at [2].
>>>
>>> I'll continue to release the staging repository after the grace period
>>> of 4 hours.
>>>
>>> Kind Regards,
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/directory/buildtools/junit-addons/tags/0.1/
>>> [2]
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedirectory-046/
>>> [3]
>>> http://code.google.com/p/mycila/source/browse/mycila-junit/tags/mycila-junit-1.0.ga/src/main/java/com/mycila/junit/concurrent
>>> [4] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
>>>
>> Hold on a second. We need a formal vote on this!
>>
>> The 4 hour exception to the 72 hour vote process is just for the TLP
>> pom. The TLP pom does not have the same legal requirements as a
>> standard src/bin release artifact.
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxDEV/top-level-pom-management-policy.html
>>
>> There needs to be a review of the release artifact and the 72 vote
>> period is mandatory. I'm really sorry to say this but we have to roll
>> back this release and follow the standard operating procedures.
>
> I'm afraid Alex is right, for code releases.
>
> We probably need a vote plus a 72h delay.
>
> Question : can we ask for a vote and 72h delay with the existing released
> project, and if we do not reach a consensus (ie, 3 +1 and +1 > -1) then we
> rollback ?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Cordialement,
> Emmanuel Lécharny
> www.iktek.com
>
>

Mime
View raw message