You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> on 2012/12/01 06:08:54 UTC
Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases (was: [VOTE] Release
Apache Bloodhound 0.3 (incubating))
It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
tarball from a podling.
Activity on Bloodhound is picking up, and the project wants to release
every couple weeks; yet the 0.2 vote thread sat in general@ for longer
than that.
It's worse for these mails to go unanswered than if the release had been
vetoed. I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
release votes.
-- Brane
On 26.11.2012 16:59, Joachim Dreimann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to request the beginning of the vote for the third release of
> Apache Bloodhound in the incubator following the successful vote by the
> Bloodhound PPMC.
>
> The result of the vote is summarised here:
> http://markmail.org/thread/owksv6lbcs6zq7th
>
> The artefacts for the release including the source distribution and KEYS
> can be found here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/bloodhound/
>
> The release itself is created from:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/bloodhound/tags/0.3-incubating/
> (r1412891)
>
> Issues identified to be fixed for the next release are listed here:
> https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/273
> https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/274
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Bloodhound 0.3
> [ ] +0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package (please explain)
>
> Cheers,
> Joe
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:50 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> I know; but it got everyone's attention, didn't it. :)
Lesson learned.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 01.12.2012 16:00, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Make every vote a bugzilla issue, and use the existing script that mails
> an issue summary once a week?
That's certainly one thing I considered.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <d....@daniel.shahaf.name>.
Make every vote a bugzilla issue, and use the existing script that mails
an issue summary once a week?
Ross Gardler wrote on Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 14:55:05 +0000:
> That tool would be useful in more places than the incubator. Great idea.
> I'm looking forward to seeing it ;-)
>
> Sent from my tablet
> On Dec 1, 2012 2:51 PM, "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 01.12.2012 15:06, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
> > >> about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
> > >> tarball from a podling.
> > > Reviewing a release when you are not directly involved as a developer is
> > > **really hard**.
> > >
> > > As an IPMC member yourself, have you ever reviewed a release for podling
> > you
> > > were not involved with?
> >
> > Yes. In fact, I spent time reviewing AOO incubator releases. Don't
> > recall if I actually voted on one; probably not, since there were so
> > many other active IPMC members all over that.
> >
> > > I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
> > > release votes.
> > > -1
> > >
> > > That's at odds with basic, ASF-wide rules for voting on releases.
> >
> > I know; but it got everyone's attention, didn't it. :)
> >
> > What I'd more seriously like to propose is that we come up with a tool
> > that slurps the general@ archives and pings the list once a week with a
> > reminder about outstanding votes. I'll happily invest my copious free
> > time towards that, if the IPMC agrees such a tool would be useful.
> >
> > -- Brane
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
That tool would be useful in more places than the incubator. Great idea.
I'm looking forward to seeing it ;-)
Sent from my tablet
On Dec 1, 2012 2:51 PM, "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 01.12.2012 15:06, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
> >> about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
> >> tarball from a podling.
> > Reviewing a release when you are not directly involved as a developer is
> > **really hard**.
> >
> > As an IPMC member yourself, have you ever reviewed a release for podling
> you
> > were not involved with?
>
> Yes. In fact, I spent time reviewing AOO incubator releases. Don't
> recall if I actually voted on one; probably not, since there were so
> many other active IPMC members all over that.
>
> > I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
> > release votes.
> > -1
> >
> > That's at odds with basic, ASF-wide rules for voting on releases.
>
> I know; but it got everyone's attention, didn't it. :)
>
> What I'd more seriously like to propose is that we come up with a tool
> that slurps the general@ archives and pings the list once a week with a
> reminder about outstanding votes. I'll happily invest my copious free
> time towards that, if the IPMC agrees such a tool would be useful.
>
> -- Brane
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 01.12.2012 15:06, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>> It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
>> about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
>> tarball from a podling.
> Reviewing a release when you are not directly involved as a developer is
> **really hard**.
>
> As an IPMC member yourself, have you ever reviewed a release for podling you
> were not involved with?
Yes. In fact, I spent time reviewing AOO incubator releases. Don't
recall if I actually voted on one; probably not, since there were so
many other active IPMC members all over that.
> I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
> release votes.
> -1
>
> That's at odds with basic, ASF-wide rules for voting on releases.
I know; but it got everyone's attention, didn't it. :)
What I'd more seriously like to propose is that we come up with a tool
that slurps the general@ archives and pings the list once a week with a
reminder about outstanding votes. I'll happily invest my copious free
time towards that, if the IPMC agrees such a tool would be useful.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases (was: [VOTE]
Release Apache Bloodhound 0.3 (incubating))
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
> about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
> tarball from a podling.
Reviewing a release when you are not directly involved as a developer is
**really hard**.
As an IPMC member yourself, have you ever reviewed a release for podling you
were not involved with? There have been release candidates for podlings other
than Bloodhound which have gone waiting. A detailed review from you on one of
those -- with or without a vote, comprehensive or partial -- would be a
welcome contribution.
> Activity on Bloodhound is picking up, and the project wants to release
> every couple weeks;
I suspect that pace is not realistic while Bloodhound remains in the Incubator
unless the podling manages to land a third core contributor who is also on the
IPMC to go with yourself and Hyrum.
> I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
> release votes.
-1
That's at odds with basic, ASF-wide rules for voting on releases.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases (was: [VOTE]
Release Apache Bloodhound 0.3 (incubating))
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Sorry, seems it was Luciano I agreed with.
Sent from my tablet
On Dec 1, 2012 8:43 AM, "Ross Gardler" <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> I'm with Benson here. But we do need to acknowledge the problem identified
> (again) by Branko.
>
> This is a mentoring problem not an IPMC problem. The IPMC needs to solve
> it for existing podlings, and podlings where mentors have gone quiet but we
> need to express higher expectations of mentors for new podlings.
>
> Branko, talk to your mentors. If that fails talk to the IPMC.
>
> Sent from my tablet
> On Dec 1, 2012 7:36 AM, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
>> > about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
>> > tarball from a podling.
>> >
>> > Activity on Bloodhound is picking up, and the project wants to release
>> > every couple weeks; yet the 0.2 vote thread sat in general@ for longer
>> > than that.
>> >
>> > It's worse for these mails to go unanswered than if the release had been
>> > vetoed. I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
>> > release votes.
>> >
>> > -- Brane
>> >
>> >
>> -1 for extending the silent consensus rule to podling release votes. BTW,
>> have you got any IPMC binding votes from your mentors ?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Luciano Resende
>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>>
>
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases (was: [VOTE]
Release Apache Bloodhound 0.3 (incubating))
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
I'm with Benson here. But we do need to acknowledge the problem identified
(again) by Branko.
This is a mentoring problem not an IPMC problem. The IPMC needs to solve it
for existing podlings, and podlings where mentors have gone quiet but we
need to express higher expectations of mentors for new podlings.
Branko, talk to your mentors. If that fails talk to the IPMC.
Sent from my tablet
On Dec 1, 2012 7:36 AM, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
> > about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
> > tarball from a podling.
> >
> > Activity on Bloodhound is picking up, and the project wants to release
> > every couple weeks; yet the 0.2 vote thread sat in general@ for longer
> > than that.
> >
> > It's worse for these mails to go unanswered than if the release had been
> > vetoed. I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
> > release votes.
> >
> > -- Brane
> >
> >
> -1 for extending the silent consensus rule to podling release votes. BTW,
> have you got any IPMC binding votes from your mentors ?
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
Re: Invoke silent consensus rule for podling releases (was: [VOTE]
Release Apache Bloodhound 0.3 (incubating))
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> It's quite frustrating that people find time to write hundreds of mails
> about points of procedure, but can't take time to review a release
> tarball from a podling.
>
> Activity on Bloodhound is picking up, and the project wants to release
> every couple weeks; yet the 0.2 vote thread sat in general@ for longer
> than that.
>
> It's worse for these mails to go unanswered than if the release had been
> vetoed. I hereby propose we extend the silent consensus rule to podling
> release votes.
>
> -- Brane
>
>
-1 for extending the silent consensus rule to podling release votes. BTW,
have you got any IPMC binding votes from your mentors ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/