Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 43135 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2006 22:33:37 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Dec 2006 22:33:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 19827 invoked by uid 500); 11 Dec 2006 22:33:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 19522 invoked by uid 500); 11 Dec 2006 22:33:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 19511 invoked by uid 99); 11 Dec 2006 22:33:42 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:33:42 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [68.230.241.35] (HELO fed1rmmtao04.cox.net) (68.230.241.35) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:33:31 -0800 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao04.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061211223310.XVNA7494.fed1rmmtao04.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 17:33:10 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.133] ([70.187.176.185]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id xaZJ1V00u40NznJ0000000; Mon, 11 Dec 2006 17:33:21 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) In-Reply-To: <1295E8B8-9804-4136-BE46-37684F3D180A@maven.org> References: <487a994c0612100547p7c275f58yae40ab67495cac23@mail.gmail.com> <628A59A6-354D-4EC3-BFE6-E827D4625832@gmail.com> <16d6c6200612101702r37b2693jb1fe252a7e1457a6@mail.gmail.com> <1295E8B8-9804-4136-BE46-37684F3D180A@maven.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Roy T. Fielding" Subject: release voting Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 14:33:08 -0800 To: general@incubator.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Dec 10, 2006, at 5:11 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > On 10 Dec 06, at 8:02 PM 10 Dec 06, Martin Cooper wrote: >> On 12/10/06, Jason van Zyl wrote: >>> On 10 Dec 06, at 6:40 PM 10 Dec 06, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >>> >>> > On Dec 10, 2006, at 5:47 AM, Karl Pauls wrote: >>> > >>> >> We ask that you please vote to approve this release: >>> >> >>> >> [ ] +1 Approve the Felix 0.8.0-incubator release. >>> >> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments) >>> > >>> > BTW, this Veto thing is wrong. I've been meaning to mention it >>> > since several podlings have used this template. It is not >>> possible >>> > to veto a release -- all releases are majority votes. +1 just >>> means >>> > yes and -1 means no. >>> > >>> >>> Really? >>> >>> I thought that would be considered a technical thing? If you know a >>> release is getting pushed out when it shouldn't because it's >>> premature that on technical grounds you could say that it doesn't >>> meet the requirements of a beta say? Or that it has know flaws and >>> shouldn't be released? No. The only things that can be vetoed are specific changes, and the veto must have a technical reason that is valid for that change. Otherwise, one stubborn person can effectively kill a project simply by vetoing every choice made by the group. >> See the section on "Votes on Package Releases" here: >> >> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html Yow, more hopelessly vague wordings. Look at the original httpd voting guidelines for a better picture. > Can a PMC chair veto a release? No. A chair only counts as one vote. A chair's only special powers are to receive things officially and ensure that the PMC does vote. They can stop a package from being published if it has not yet been released by vote of the PMC, but they can't unilaterally decide to release or unrelease a given package. If a chair wants such a thing, they need to convince a majority of those voting to support their position, just like any other majority decision. Under no circumstances does a chair have any other special powers. We burden the chair with infrastructure tasks just because we need to delegate some of that work, not because we think they are making decisions for the PMC. A project decision must be made by the project. The responsibility assigned to the chair by the bylaws is to give one person the responsibility to ensure that decisions are made by the project and maintain communication with the board -- it is the PMC that is given authority to make project decisions, not the chair. An RM can choose not to upload a release, but the package is released if the project votes to release it. Infrastructure or the Board can remove a release from our websites if that is in the ASF's best interests. There is no "legal veto". If a legal problem is found with a package, the ASF expects the responsible PMC members to change their own votes in response to that discovery. If for some odd reason that does not occur, the Board can direct infrastructure to do anything needed, but it can't rewrite history -- the package has been released and the most the ASF can do is make it hard to obtain by stopping our own distribution mechanisms. ....Roy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org