maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Should we respin CANCELLED releases with the same version number?
Date Thu, 30 May 2013 20:06:24 GMT
I will be counting spilt votes like this as the actual release vote... If
we want to finesse for alpha and beta after the principle for releases is
established, we can have another vote...

So to clarify: Robert's vote is currently

-1 reuse version numbers when respinning

On Thursday, 30 May 2013, Robert Scholte wrote:

> Let me rephrase my vote:
>
> +1 for qualified releases
>
> -1 for actual releases
>
> Robert
>
> Op Wed, 29 May 2013 19:07:59 +0200 schreef Robert Scholte <
> rfscholte@apache.org>:
>
>  -1 (binding) on actual releases
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> Op Wed, 29 May 2013 15:20:17 +0200 schreef Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org
>> >:
>>
>>  +1 for "qualified" releases (alpha, beta, RC, etc…) that are working
>>> toward the full blow release but aren't intended to be that.
>>>
>>> -1 for the actual releases.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 29, 2013, at 6:01 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  We have been using a policy of only making releases without skipping
>>>> version numbers, e.g.
>>>>
>>>> 3.0.0, 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.0.3, 3.0.4, 3.0.5, etc
>>>>
>>>> Whereby if there is something wrong with the artifacts staged for
>>>> release,
>>>> we drop the staging repo, delete the tag, roll back the version, and run
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> This vote is to change the policy to:
>>>>
>>>> drop the staging repo, document the release as not released, and run
>>>> with
>>>> the next version.
>>>>
>>>> Under this new proposal, if the staged artifacts for 3.1.0 fail to meet
>>>> the
>>>> release criteria, then the artifacts would be dropped from the staging
>>>> repository and never see the light of day. The tag would remain in SCM,
>>>> and
>>>> we would document (somewhere) that the release was cancelled. The
>>>> "respin"
>>>> would have version number 3.1.1 and there would never be a 3.1.0.
>>>>
>>>> This change could mean that the first actual release of 3.1.x might end
>>>> up
>>>> being 3.1.67 (though I personally view that as unlikely, and in the
>>>> context
>>>> of 3.1.x I think we are very nearly there)
>>>>
>>>> Please Note:
>>>> http://maven.apache.org/**developers/release/maven-**
>>>> project-release-procedure.**html#Check_the_vote_**resultsdoes<http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-project-release-procedure.html#Check_the_vote_resultsdoes>
>>>> not actually specify what it means by "the process will need to be
>>>> restarted" so this vote will effect a change either outcome
>>>>
>>>> +1: Never respin with the same version number, always increment the
>>>> version
>>>> for a respin
>>>> 0: Don't care
>>>> -1: Always respin with the same version number until that version number
>>>> gets released
>>>>
>>>> This vote will be open for 72 hours. A Majority of PMC votes greater
>>>> that 3
>>>> will be deemed as decisive in either direction (i.e. if the sum is < -3
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>>> +3 then there is a documented result)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For any releases in progress at this point in time, it is up to the
>>>> release
>>>> manager to decide what to do if they need to do a respin.
>>>>
>>>> -Stephen
>>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>

-- 
Sent from my phone

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message