Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of luckbr1975@gmail.com designates
 209.85.215.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50B990E6.8010801@apache.org>
References: 
 <CAKoya900hsgO5hLWkYzKmdF+xM=iojPmAM3UFXQyLjhtN=uSOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50B990E6.8010801@apache.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 23:36:02 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAGU5spdF+V1Y47sf0PW38bjPM5AVBCFBzoWLo9ci4iSRUiJ7oA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases (was: [VOTE]
 Release Apache Bloodhound 0.3 (incubating))
From: Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com>
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d040716e3734e6004cfc5919e

--f46d040716e3734e6004cfc5919e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko =C4=8Cibej <brane@apache.org> wrote=
:

> It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
> about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
> tarball from a podling.
>
> Activity on Bloodhound is picking up, and the project wants to release
> every couple weeks; yet the 0.2 vote thread sat in general@ for longer
> than that.
>
> It's worse for these mails to go unanswered than if the release had been
> vetoed. I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
> release votes.
>
> -- Brane
>
>
-1 for  extending the silent consensus rule to podling release votes. BTW,
have you got any IPMC binding votes from your mentors ?


--=20
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

--f46d040716e3734e6004cfc5919e--