Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=4jGxkzQkOxYfk0EGTvnForqamGlo7zpcg/zCHKRBR2MR+EISeUcQJozo7EfVCtf0p1POswC99SM7OQanafWvKm7URjOlgVddxNOxfheRWYIvCEdR0d7mJEuWYcKsyBeG3C01e5V0PEV7Oe4L0jjCxT4fhrxZcdGlOl9yMkR3FMU=;
References: 
 <CAFbh0Q2gbWRJwUHghRXKEfZvyuxHkaBbza8jJ1HM4yk3xpTmUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1322421695.97193.YahooMailNeo@web160917.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <B5F23F36-86E6-4A5A-BF84-69427282A430@jpl.nasa.gov>
 <CAKTa1mi5=VOsv37-wVE4M1HHg+RfYRa2yGuieoPmYAND1WTC4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1322427910.14902.YahooMailNeo@web160909.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 13:05:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: concerns about high overhead in Apache incubator releases
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Cc: "kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org" <kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKTa1mi5=VOsv37-wVE4M1HHg+RfYRa2yGuieoPmYAND1WTC4Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0A=0A> From: Robert Burrell Donkin <robe=
rtburrelldonkin@gmail.com>=0A> To: general@incubator.apache.org=0A> Cc: Joe=
 Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>; "kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org" <kafka=
-dev@incubator.apache.org>=0A> Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 3:53 PM=0A> =
Subject: Re: concerns about high overhead in Apache incubator releases=0A> =
=0A> On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)=0A> <chris.a=
.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:=0A>>  On Nov 27, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Joe Scha=
efer wrote:=0A>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>>  ----- Original Message=
 -----=0A>>>>  From: Jun Rao <junrao@gmail.com>=0A>>>>  To: general@incubat=
or.apache.org=0A>>>>  Cc: kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org=0A>>>>  Sent: Sund=
ay, November 27, 2011 2:13 PM=0A>>>>  Subject: concerns about high overhead=
 in Apache incubator releases=0A>>>> =0A>>>>  Dear Apache members,=0A>>> =
=0A>>>  [...]=0A>>> =0A>>>>  2. Different Apache members have different int=
erpretations of the =0A> same rule.=0A>>>>  It seems that there is no conse=
nsus on some of the basic rules even =0A> among=0A>>>>  Apache members. For=
 example, what constitutes a source distribution =0A> and=0A>>>>  what shou=
ld be put in the NOTICE file? Since all it takes is one =0A> negative=0A>>>=
>  vote to block a release, this increases the turnover rate of RCs.=0A>>> =
=0A>>>  NO. =A0The only time someone can claim to hold a veto over a releas=
e vote =0A> is=0A>>>  when they are jibberjabbering about legal issues. =A0=
NOTICE errors really=0A>>>  don't risk a lawsuit from anyone, so those -1's=
 are NOT vetoes.=0A>> =0A>>  If Joe didn't send this reply, I was about to =
myself. Here's 2 IPMC =0A> members that=0A>>  *do* agree on this: Joe is ri=
ght, VETOs do *not* apply to releases of code.=0A> =0A> Any legal issue ser=
ious enough to VETO a release would require code=0A> access to be blocked a=
nd all discussions taken private. Anything short=0A> of this isn't a VETO.=
=0A=0AI wouldn't go that far.=A0 I mean if a podling is trying to ship GPL =
code or hasn't=0Acompleted its IP checklist, it shouldn't be releasing soft=
ware from the ASF=0Ayet.=A0 Those aren't issues that require privacy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org