From general-return-22967-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Sun Aug 23 08:00:26 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 58849 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2009 08:00:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Aug 2009 08:00:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 35705 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2009 08:00:46 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 35498 invoked by uid 500); 23 Aug 2009 08:00:46 -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 35488 invoked by uid 99); 23 Aug 2009 08:00:46 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:00:46 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of ant.elder@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.208 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.219.208] (HELO mail-ew0-f208.google.com) (209.85.219.208) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:00:38 +0000 Received: by ewy4 with SMTP id 4so1680931ewy.27 for ; Sun, 23 Aug 2009 01:00:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:reply-to:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=E8wERSDnBF2nO/gbWx1O4d4XfJ7zRraDmIvasC2HoSk=; b=S1jlrRkIjRc21uLWVWxT0AMGEWEqwD1ET3zMjbpmeM20AzM04eMuzAutsol02Hz4/5 H+kXVsFYx3AJz44dh1Z8+LqbjqPG/6yB9qumZQ/ssvwIMQvqA/m9oq98/StX1kQRFHHT s1q8gQrDDWuvsDGVe9SZMY5Kp5Z7B4HMAmY+8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=XsWgQTF/lCdTUVKULm8x7yYkeutdM4F7N2EC/8UCqQS7IGDKbItCXowXwnwZD519Ja fzZZkmHFAQkityGfnGHcW24Z+3B46kO29zqym8HG7voswmI6sPJ07SHeegXrZCpj+QJG PYJnqQIGWAHZrfMdb7qAp7KtRN3kFFuyp6Otg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: ant.elder@gmail.com Reply-To: antelder@apache.org Received: by 10.210.41.16 with SMTP id o16mr3611945ebo.80.1251014416543; Sun, 23 Aug 2009 01:00:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <71e1b5740908202332u41738a47j2d44ab4194e6ed73@mail.gmail.com> References: <71e1b5740908180853i1d6f48ftfd356b2e8ce5aa19@mail.gmail.com> <7F89E4B3-01B7-4A3C-BD91-40F89B060597@dslextreme.com> <71e1b5740908190023o4ea91be1o51a6c0a80ca63b3@mail.gmail.com> <8DAE0467-1E61-44E6-A026-2F21BD7B7712@SUN.com> <4A8C2FD0.7040306@rowe-clan.net> <1D05020F-2749-4F69-9883-2769237CE9F8@sauria.com> <71e1b5740908200112o5874ee10m8ddf53aed03b8aa1@mail.gmail.com> <55afdc850908200401t2da29d2bk4c946538f85cdd6c@mail.gmail.com> <71e1b5740908202332u41738a47j2d44ab4194e6ed73@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:00:16 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: babd46f395ed8533 Message-ID: <71e1b5740908230100w68ad6320oa8abd73435936400@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Making up policy on the fly From: ant elder To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 7:32 AM, ant elder wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Niall > Pemberton wrote: >> If there are improvements that can be made to policy/docs then great, >> but complaining about feedback rather than appreciating that someone >> took the trouble to review a release is a mistake IMO. >> > > Several improvements have been suggested on this thread so far, the > two mains ones are: > > - hold the release votes on the poddling mailing lists not general@ > - make complying with "best practices" a graduation requirement not a > release requirement > Some more suggestions: - When issues come up during release reviews we often debate them here instead of getting documented answers from those that know so perhaps we should make more use of the ASF Legal Affairs Committee JIRA space - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL - Use VOTE threads for voting. This is I think accepted best practice but quite often in our release vote threads we get posts with a list of issues but no vote and it can be hard to determine which if any are considered blocking problems that require a respin. I know I've been guilty of this too. Would it help if we all try to be clearer in our reviews and actually include a vote, or at least state precisely which issues need clarification before we'd vote? ...ant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org