incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael MacFadden <michael.macfad...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10
Date Wed, 21 Oct 2015 18:00:44 GMT
Ok,

I am revising the legal perspective today.




On 10/20/15, 6:40 PM, "Upayavira" <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:

>As far as I'm concerned, you can still vote on the existing thread.
>Please vote from a legal perspective rather than a technical one.
>
>The timeframe is set to ensure people have the ability to vote - it
>isn't a requirement that it completes within a specific timeframe.
>
>thx.
>
>Upayavira
>
>On Mon, Oct 19, 2015, at 09:39 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
>> All,
>> 
>> I still find the Wave project quite interesting and am more than happy to
>> help.  I just haven’t really felt the pull of the community.  If I
>> thought there we something specific I could do to help I would be more
>> than happy.  I would like to see the release finally happen.  Even if we
>> eventually move away it would be nice to have completed this process once
>> during the life of the project.
>> 
>> If there is another vote I will participate.  I will review the process
>> and functional status and provide a vote.
>> 
>> So you can count me in.
>> 
>> ~Michael
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/18/15, 4:56 AM, "Upayavira" <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> >Non-binding votes have a different value. If we had insufficient
>> >committer/PPMC votes but loads of quality (I.e not drive by) non-binding
>> >votes, it would suggest we have a different problem, and could look how
>> >to addresss that.
>> >
>> >Upayavira
>> >
>> >On Sat, Oct 17, 2015, at 09:33 PM, Zachary Yaro wrote:
>> >> I would have cast a vote, but I read non-binding votes were discouraged.
>> >> To clarify, what are the criteria for being able to cast a binding vote
>> >> for
>> >> this project?
>> >> 
>> >> Zachary Yaro
>> >> 
>> >> On 17 October 2015 at 21:48, Ali Lown <ali@lown.me.uk> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> > Hi all,
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks to Yuri and Jeremy for downloading and trying out this RC.
>> >> >
>> >> > Well, I set a "deadline" around the 17th October which has now well
>> >> > and truly passed.
>> >> >
>> >> > My vote on the matter was a +1 (though I realize that I failed to put
>> >> > this in my original email, so you are allowed to ignore this for
>> >> > failing to meet my own deadline).
>> >> >
>> >> > The result looks something like (including mine):
>> >> > +1: 3 (2 binding)
>> >> > +0: 0
>> >> > -0: 0
>> >> > -1: 0
>> >> >
>> >> > Unfortunately we have had insufficient votes to meet the release
>> >> > requirement (minimum of 3 +1 binding votes, more + than -) [0].
>> >> > Binding votes as decided by people in [1].
>> >> >
>> >> > @Yuri/Jeremy: How do you feel now about us moving away from Apache,
as
>> >> > this vote does seem to suggest that there is not enough interest from
>> >> > the currently defined committers to maintain this project here.
>> >> >
>> >> > I am not really sure why none of the other committers responded at
all
>> >> > to the vote...
>> >> >
>> >> > Ali
>> >> >
>> >> > [0]:
>> >> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification
>> >> > [1]: https://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#wave
>> >> >
>> >> > On 14 October 2015 at 17:27, Jérémy Naegel <jeremy.ngl@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >> > > +1
>> >> > >
>> >> > > +Jérémy Naegel <http://google.com/+JérémyNaegel
>> >> > <http://google.com/+J%C3%A9r%C3%A9myNaegel>>
>> >> > > Public Information Officer
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Yuri Z <vega113@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> +1
>> >> > >> I did the following:
>> >> > >> - Checked signatures
>> >> > >> - Opened the binary and verified it works.
>> >> > >> - Opened the source and verified that it can be built and
works.
>> >> > >> - Reviewed the changes for the rc 10.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Ali - Thanks for making this RC!
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:59 AM Ali Lown <ali@lown.me.uk>
wrote:
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> > Hi all,
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > RC10 is now available for review.
>> >> > >> > Artefacts can be found here:
>> >> > >> > https://people.apache.org/~al/wave_rc/0.4-rc10/
>> >> > >> > (Remember checksums are from 'gpg --print-md SHA512 $f
> $f.sha')
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > I have included both source and binary artefacts for
convenience.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > The release version (if successful) will be 0.4.0-incubating
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > This is taken from the branch 0.4.0-rc10 of the incubator-wave
>> >> > >> repository.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Notable changes since earlier initial release attempts
include:
>> >> > >> > - Use of typesafe config
>> >> > >> > - Bumped versions of Jetty, GWT, etc.
>> >> > >> > - Assorted tweaks to build system
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > A summary of useful information can be found in RELEASE-NOTES,
and a
>> >> > >> > list of changes in CHANGES in the source artefacts.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Action Required:
>> >> > >> > Please go and test these packages (most importantly the
source ones)
>> >> > >> > for any outstanding legal problems, or any runtime problems
in a
>> >> > >> > 'standard' configuration.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > We are not looking for a perfect first release, as there
is plenty of
>> >> > >> > time to fix outstanding bugs in future releases, but
we do want to get
>> >> > >> > 0.4 out soon (at long last).
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > This vote will close around 0000 GMT 17th October 2015.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > [ ] +1 Release it!
>> >> > >> > [ ] +0 Ok, but...
>> >> > >> > [ ] -0  Ok, but you really should fix...
>> >> > >> > [ ] -1 Definitely do not release this because...
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Thanks,
>> >> > >> > Ali
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >>
>> >> >
>> 


Mime
View raw message