Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E472C11699 for ; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 05:03:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 79371 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jun 2014 05:03:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 79134 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jun 2014 05:03:26 -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 79103 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jun 2014 05:03:26 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 05:03:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at spf.trusted-forwarder.org) Received: from [209.85.220.169] (HELO mail-vc0-f169.google.com) (209.85.220.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 05:03:20 +0000 Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id la4so7085241vcb.14 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:02:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=42ZYLHGMp4hTvdbbyYNYI9D0YpljCzh1p4QVxx7T9Rw=; b=CPQar+ggxsldE9mFTlqLoMclg+fi4X3RUqOSPuVGWTh50uZjyV4+LDyvAOYWAzYHrF NZ8Qchu1sZqGA1De/43dr+WgVjMqo9JgMPqaMnlAMJb5Tf+oop02uTzRpH82yMi8o2Vi swRGozval1oglzi7kdSuFq6bOCG7LnibUYD07t4Yu7CPC/QNds4xGXOJ5qk30lTlpPt+ QSgarXK3qbF/WDCsTUOv9UVO6rSygc137ADRQToWFUqCSIuwhIk9YotwEy/hcvGLUzf0 heB3juDpDbXR3x49kNYp0aHrm+a5I7p3xyP5RE6o6fK2vf3i3pEuGCbmJF1g1qhEH5w5 7OSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkECqU/A3TnOcROKdQ8AUg+vwn1LM7qzogN6P1dcakUWS/FNjzGXfdNufwAgUj2Ipjfl5bo MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.121.112 with SMTP id lj16mr19426316vdb.29.1403586179058; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:02:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.24.41 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:02:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [99.46.94.139] In-Reply-To: References: <01BAC2DB-BC6F-41E7-8EB0-58E33616DF8C@apache.org> <0C9A3150-FAA1-4993-A400-82B05F319E05@toolazydogs.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:02:59 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Storm 0.9.2-incubating From: Marvin Humphrey To: "general@incubator.apache.org" Cc: dev@storm.incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org P. Taylor Goetz wrote: > As I understand it, using the the alternate voting system requires IPMC > approval (correct me if I'm wrong...). Yes, an IPMC vote is required for a podling to participate in the alternate release procedure. > Is it as difficult to get IPMC votes for that approval as it is for release > VOTEs? Only one podling has participated so far -- ODF Toolkit -- and that vote passed without incident. I doubt that passing such votes will ever be a problem, because even under the alternate procedure, the first incubating release requires three IPMC +1 votes -- the voting criteria are only relaxed for later releases. Any IPMC member who votes -1 to prevent a podling from using the alternate procedure should expect questions along the lines of... * "Why? They already made one release." * "If you're opposed to the use of the alternate release procedure, are you willing to review the release?" So, it may be the case that even starting down the path of the alternate process shakes loose some IPMC votes. In my view the alternate process is superior to the standard process, but I'd consider expediting the standard process an acceptable outcome and I'm sure most podlings would as well. > If we seek and get that approval, can we apply it to that VOTE and release > by filling out and committing the template? This question is moot since you've now got your 3 IPMC +1 votes, but for the record I'd expect new vote threads since the template has to be approved. Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org