Re: svn commit: r1867063 - /subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/releasing.part.html

[Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>]

julianfoad@apache.org wrote on Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:49 +00:00:
> +++ subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/releasing.part.html Tue Sep 17 14:49:51 2019
> @@ -687,7 +687,7 @@ it.</p>
>  
>  <p><b>For a non-LTS ("regular") release line</b></p>
>  
> -<p>A change is approved if it receives one +1 vote and no vetoes.  (Only
> +<p>A change is approved if it receives two +1s and no vetoes.  (Only
>  binding votes count; see above.)</p>
>  
>  <p><b>For an LTS release line</b></p>

My reading of consensus is that we changed "three +1s" to "two +1s" for non-LTS
lines, but didn't _increase_ the bar in any way.

However, as written, this change could be taken as saying that the rule
of "one +1 and one +0" does not apply to bindings changes to non-LTS
lines.  (It's not clear whether the "preceded by a bold paragraph" unary
operator has a higher or lower precedence than the binary "paragraph
juxtaposition" operator.)  Clarify, please?

Cheers,

Daniel

Re: svn commit: r1867063 - /subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/releasing.part.html

[Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>]

Julian Foad wrote on Wed, 18 Sep 2019 10:01 +00:00:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > However, as written, this change could be taken as saying that the rule
> > of "one +1 and one +0" does not apply to bindings changes to non-LTS
> > lines.  (It's not clear whether the "preceded by a bold paragraph" unary
> > operator has a higher or lower precedence than the binary "paragraph
> > juxtaposition" operator.)  Clarify, please?
> 
> Thanks for your precision, again!  Does http://svn.apache.org/r1867110 
> sufficiently clarify the ambiguity?

It certainly does.  Thanks!

Re: svn commit: r1867063 - /subversion/site/staging/docs/community-guide/releasing.part.html

[Julian Foad <ju...@apache.org>]

Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> My reading of consensus is that we changed "three +1s" to "two +1s" for non-LTS
> lines, but didn't _increase_ the bar in any way.

Agreed.

> However, as written, this change could be taken as saying that the rule
> of "one +1 and one +0" does not apply to bindings changes to non-LTS
> lines.  (It's not clear whether the "preceded by a bold paragraph" unary
> operator has a higher or lower precedence than the binary "paragraph
> juxtaposition" operator.)  Clarify, please?

Thanks for your precision, again!  Does http://svn.apache.org/r1867110 
sufficiently clarify the ambiguity?

- Julian