geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <>
Subject Re: [vote] Release geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0
Date Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:50:50 GMT

On Dec 21, 2006, at 6:46 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:

> On Dec 21, 2006, at 9:21 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>> I think David is treating the branch as somewhat official and is
>> bringing the community into it...nothing wrong with a healthy vote.
>> I suggest we head off what looks like may be turning into a "bike  
>> shed"
>> thread. ;-)
> Not my intent.  I'd like to wait for David's response.  I'm  
> assuming that this series of votes is to notify folks that a branch  
> is ready to begin a release cycle.  I'm +1 for that.  Just wanted  
> to make sure I knew what I was voting for :)
> Let's wait for David to clarify.

It was something Roy said recently on Incubator general that  

On Dec 7, 2006, at 3:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> FYI, traditionally, all release votes are for the source code  
> package and
> only that package.  Once the source code version is set in stone,  
> binaries
> and assorted other release artifacts can be generated by individual
> committers without a vote if the group trusts them to do so and they
> have a signed key.  Some groups might require a vote on binaries as  
> well,
> but the ASF only requires a vote on the source.

I like voting on binaries for most our stuff as our build is  
massively complex.  But in this case I figured I'd give the "do you  
trust me to build/publish" angle a try as these are tiny little jars  
that aren't complicated and it's way easier to just run the maven  
publish command on them after the vote than it is to create a  
"staging" build for each one and figuring out a non-trivial way to  
publish them later.


View raw message