geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Vote] Geronimo Eclipse Plugin v1.1.0
Date Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:22:19 GMT

On Jul 10, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:

> Ok thanks for the correction.  So what classifies a veto?

IIUC, only code (i.e. a commit) can be vetoed. If any license/legal- 
type issues are uncovered in the release, then that's probably a stop- 
release problem (effectively a veto). I think our goal should be to  
avoid releasing with any outstanding -1 votes, but it's not a  
requirement...

--kevan

>
> On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:54 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:07 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 10, 2006, at 5:16 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/10/06, Sachin Patel <sppatel2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No critical reason, just a time frame on when I'll upload the  
>>>>> driver to the
>>>>> distribution size if no -1's have been casted.
>>>>
>>>> That's interesting...would that mean that if Geronimo 1.2 is  
>>>> about to
>>>> release only 72 hours matters or 3+ votes?
>>>
>>> Is it required that every PMC must vote? If not, then yes, I  
>>> would think so.  A released is only stopped if a -1 is received,  
>>> not if people abstain from a vote.
>>
>> No, that's not right. A release is a majority vote. You can't  
>> "veto" a release with a -1. And, I think, there's no minimum vote  
>> requirement. Although if you only have 3 +1 votes, then I'd say  
>> something is probably wrong...  72 hours seems to be considered a  
>> minimum vote timeframe... I think we had something similar for  
>> some of the G 1.1 release votes...
>>
>> --kevan
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The first one just unzips into your ECLIPSE_HOME.  Once  
>>>>> released, the second
>>>>> is the distribution that gets unzipped into the update manager  
>>>>> site.  The
>>>>> packaging is a little different.  The second one can also be  
>>>>> tested by
>>>>> unzipping anywhere on your filesystem and creating a "local"  
>>>>> update site to
>>>>> it.  The site.xml is not really needed to test it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Which one do I need to download
>>>>> and what are the steps to test it out? Just unpack to  
>>>>> $ECLIPSE_HOME
>>>>> dir? Just downloaded Eclipse 3.2 and am ready to give it a whirl.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You can start with Eclipse 3.2 but will need to go to the  
>>>>> update manager to
>>>>> add WTP and its requirements.  Or you can download the WTP-all  
>>>>> in one
>>>>> package.  I'm working as-we speak on a eclipse-plugin FAQ for  
>>>>> the wiki that
>>>>> will contain further detailed info.
>>>>
>>>> Looking forward to reading it.
>>>>
>>>> Another question is about the naming - why is the plugin named -
>>>> g-eclipse-... nor geronimo-eclipse-...?
>>>
>>> No reason.  I can rename them.  Keep in mind these zips are not  
>>> the primary way of installation and only an alternate, as the  
>>> recommended approach to installing is through the update manager.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jacek
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Jacek Laskowski
>>>> http://www.laskowski.net.pl
>>>
>>>
>>> -sachin
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> -sachin
>
>


Mime
View raw message