flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Om <bigosma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [MENTORS] Release Policy
Date Wed, 02 Jan 2013 20:18:51 GMT
Thanks Greg.

Alex, I think it is pretty clear from Greg's response on how we want to
proceed.  Do you have any more clarifications, or can we go ahead with the
[VOTE] for RC1?


On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Greg Reddin <gredbug@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
> > As you may have seen, there is a long thread going on about the installer
> > and its deployment of a .xml file on the Apache Flex website.  The main
> > question is: Is this .xml file considered “source material” and therefore
> > does it require a vote before being pushed to the Apache Flex website?
> >
> I haven't completely followed the discussion, but here's my opinion,
> assuming I understand everything correctly:
> The XML file is similar to a properties file or other config file that is
> shipped with a product. We ship one out with the release so people using
> the release will have an example, but, for the most part, they are expected
> to change it if they want to configure the installer to do something
> different than its "out of the box" configuration.
> If this understanding is correct, then it must be voted on before being
> released - i.e. included in a distribution that is an official Apache
> release.
> Things pushed to the website do not need to be voted on normally. The
> website is not an official Apache release. It is updated by checking things
> into a Subversion tree. It is peer-reviewed in the same manner that source
> code is when it is checked in. If a committer objects to a commit he/she
> can veto the commit and offer an alternative. If the community can't reach
> consensus about what should be committed then a vote may be required. I've
> never seen this happen. I've only rarely seen someone veto a commit.
> Usually the reason is obvious and there is no argument. I'm sure somewhere
> at Apache there has been a disputed commit that was hard to work out on a
> dev list, but I have not been part of that process.
> So, just in case the above didn't answer your questions, see below:
> The follow-up questions are:
> > 1) Can such a file even be pushed to the Apache Flex website or can it
> > only live in the dist folder?
> >
> Yes it can be pushed to the site. The one is the "dist" folder would act as
> an example. The two files are different files which go through different
> review processes before being published: one as part of a release, the
> other to the website.
> 2) Why does website content not require a vote before publishing (or is it
> > supposed to)?
> >
> Because it's not a release. It's peer-reviewed just like source code, but
> it's not "released."
> > 3) If not, what is the “line” that defines what requires a vote?  Is it
> > that it is human-readable content?
> >
> If it's released it requires a vote. If not it does not - unless consensus
> cannot be reached about what the content should be.
> Greg
> >
> > Thanks for your thoughts on this matter.
> > --
> > Alex Harui
> > Flex SDK Team
> > Adobe Systems, Inc.
> > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
> >

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