Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <55A7EE7F.6000805@apache.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 19:48:47 +0200
From: Daniel Gruno <humbedooh@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating
References: 
 <CADQzvmkt333A70zYWx6_jxH9Km4tUzYvQsXZ1eoJWafcvvz-PA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C228491-AED5-45BF-9359-991A7E96D750@classsoftware.com>
	<55A76F95.2040208@gmail.com>
 <CA+ULb+vTHGB1LgSq5j5xSYnyCmtL8Z61ethO13qbxYvCCgxzuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <55A7EB40.1080402@gmx.org>
In-Reply-To: <55A7EB40.1080402@gmx.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Can someone show me where in the bylaws this dreaded and apparently 
mandatory 72+ hour window is?
When last I looked, it was the preferred thing to do in most 
circumstances, it was not _MANDATED BY LAW_.

If this issue is as serious as you say it is, fix the minor nits, call a 
speedy new vote, get your 3x+1, get it shipped.
Just don't make it a habit.

With regards,
Daniel.

On 2015-07-16 19:34, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Am 16.07.2015 18:49, schrieb Roman Shaposhnik:
>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 1:47 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny 
>> <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Le 16/07/15 10:41, Justin Mclean a écrit :
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>> This vote passes with 4 binding "+1" votes, no "0" notes, and 2 "-1"
>>>>> binding votes.
>>>> If you read carefully I think you find there were 3 -1 votes on the 
>>>> binary releases.
>>>
>>> True. I -1 the binary release. Interesting case : should we release if
>>> we have as many -1 than +1 ?
>>
>> Personally, I'm disappointed in the podling for not taking
>> care of feedback that seems really easy to take care of.
>
> but not in time, because the apache process is too slow. What so you 
> prefer? A unfixed zero-day vulnerability reported against an apache 
> project, or a podling release which is not 100% according to strict 
> apache views. We are not a TLP yet after all.
>
> And this release is a special case.
>
> That security fix is the only reason why we did want release ASAP. We 
> own it to the community to be able to react to such things fast. And I 
> really would not like to explain to our users that we could not do a 
> release, because of a minor issue. If the apache process would not be 
> so slow, we would of course have made it different. But waiting 
> another 6 days, while some will be in holidays already, would have 
> been a problem.
>
> bye blackdrag
>


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