You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pivot.apache.org by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> on 2009/08/28 17:08:36 UTC
Vetos (was: Re: Documentation (some pages missing))
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Todd Volkert<tv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As for the broken links, I myself do not think they should hold up a
> release, but I respect your opinion. Is your -1 vote a full veto, or just a
> vote against?
Just to clarify: only code modifications can be vetoed [1, 2]:
Votes on Package Releases
Votes on whether a package is ready to be released follow a format
similar to majority approval -- except that the decision is officially
determined solely by whether at least three +1 votes were registered.
***Releases may not be vetoed***. Generally the community will table
the vote to release if anyone identifies serious problems, but in most
cases the ultimate decision, once three or more positive votes have
been garnered, lies with the individual serving as release manager.
The specifics of the process may vary from project to project, but the
'minimum of three +1 votes' rule is universal."
(note the ***Releases may not be vetoed***)
Martijn
[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
[2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto
Re: Vetos (was: Re: Documentation (some pages missing))
Posted by Todd Volkert <tv...@gmail.com>.
Good to know - thanks for the clarification Martijn.
-T
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dashorst@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Todd Volkert<tv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > As for the broken links, I myself do not think they should hold up a
> > release, but I respect your opinion. Is your -1 vote a full veto, or
> just a
> > vote against?
>
> Just to clarify: only code modifications can be vetoed [1, 2]:
>
> Votes on Package Releases
>
> Votes on whether a package is ready to be released follow a format
> similar to majority approval -- except that the decision is officially
> determined solely by whether at least three +1 votes were registered.
> ***Releases may not be vetoed***. Generally the community will table
> the vote to release if anyone identifies serious problems, but in most
> cases the ultimate decision, once three or more positive votes have
> been garnered, lies with the individual serving as release manager.
> The specifics of the process may vary from project to project, but the
> 'minimum of three +1 votes' rule is universal."
>
> (note the ***Releases may not be vetoed***)
>
> Martijn
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto
>
Re: Vetos (was: Re: Documentation (some pages missing))
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
I was trying to type this in the original message, but failed to find
the right wording, so I kept it out (my wording would've been
confusing).
Thanks!
Martijn
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Niclas Hedhman<ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Martijn
> Dashorst<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> ***Releases may not be vetoed***.
>
> To be absolutely clear; Yes they sort of can. If someone points out a
> *legal* problem, the release manager must not proceed. The release
> manager can also (after all it is volunteer effort) halt the release
> based on input from community, and community may have its own
> unwritten policy that full consensus should be achieved... so, there
> are variants...
>
> Veto on Commits is otherwise the tool to stop 'bad things', typically
> things like "breaking compatibility" and "security issue" are
> candidates for vetoes. Note, vetoes without justification are invalid,
> and justifications like "I don't like it" or "we don't need this
> feature" are no good as vetoes.
>
>
> Cheers
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
>
> I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
> I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
> I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type safety for web applications
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.0
Re: Vetos (was: Re: Documentation (some pages missing))
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Martijn
Dashorst<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ***Releases may not be vetoed***.
To be absolutely clear; Yes they sort of can. If someone points out a
*legal* problem, the release manager must not proceed. The release
manager can also (after all it is volunteer effort) halt the release
based on input from community, and community may have its own
unwritten policy that full consensus should be achieved... so, there
are variants...
Veto on Commits is otherwise the tool to stop 'bad things', typically
things like "breaking compatibility" and "security issue" are
candidates for vetoes. Note, vetoes without justification are invalid,
and justifications like "I don't like it" or "we don't need this
feature" are no good as vetoes.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug