Hi, I understand what Bill is saying. Let's talk specifics to see what we missed.
We had a poll on this public mailing list to decide on a time and date to cut 6.0.1. We agreed on a time/date, and cut the release then. We announced here that the release was available and said we'd have a stability vote in one week. The release was tentatively rated as alpha by the release manager. After a week, we had the stability vote, and decided the release is indeed alpha and not more stable. We also decided to cut 6.0.2 next. What did we miss? Was it a formal announcement to [EMAIL PROTECTED] about 6.0.1 stability? Was it formally marking the 6.0.1 time/date poll as a voting thread and posting its results? Yoav On 11/17/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote: > William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >> Guys - something got broken again in your release process against ASF >> policy... >> I don't see three +1's for any of the recent postings to your >> downloads page. >> > > Nothing got broken. Actually it did, because I've followed the list for some 3 years although I don't have the cycles to be active (too many fingers in other dikes within and outside the ASF). I brought this up almost a year ago now and watched as the list started voting on all it's distribution packages (e.g. 'release' in whichever form, alpha beta or general availability). Things were following the ASF procedure :) > Tomcat is probably one of the latest remaining projects > where the developers and PMC still works on the > original ASF presumptions (CTR). CTR/RTC has nothing to do with voting on the final distribution package. It has to do with how the source code repository is handled, and I think (from following the discussion on dev@) that the current policies suit the project very well. > The vote itself is a minor thing compared with all > the work and communication that happened a long time before > the email stating: "I'll make the release". No, this is what the ASF is saying - yes all those micro decisions are great so that everyone is on the same page when you get to a release, but... the only vote that binds the board and the foundation to the package is your project's release vote after the distribution package is rolled, and... that's what makes this the ASF's release, and not Remy's personal liability. Believe me, we aren't nitpicking, I don't want Remy or any other committer to be hanging out there with liabilities for something distributed by any given project. > Anyone interested can monitor the developers list and > react promptly if he thinks there is a major outage. Trust, I do :) Things are working great, and other than this issue with 6.0.1/6.0.2 I haven't seen any issues. And belated congratulations on the new 6.0 baby! > One size doesn't fit all, and never will. On this, policy for handling a distribution package, there is only one size that ensures your collective work becomes the ASF's headache, should any 'bad thing' happen in the future with respect to intellectual property or liability. I'm just looking out for you guys, especially everyone with the gumption to handle the RM's job ;) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
