incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10
Date Wed, 23 Dec 2015 16:49:30 GMT
Someone needs to just agitate on general@incubator to find a volunteer
or two to review our release.

Once it has received three +1 votes from Incubator PMC members, it will
be an official incubator release and we are done with that task.

Upayavira

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015, at 02:23 PM, Yuri Z wrote:
> @Ali @Upayavira
> Is the release still stuck?
> Are there any issues can be addressed to finalize the release?
> 
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:01 PM Michael MacFadden <
> michael.macfadden@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 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>
> > >> >> > <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