On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:06 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On 3/31/08, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 31, 2008, at 4:41 AM, sebb wrote:
On 31/03/2008, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:15 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-1: there should be NOTICE and LICENSE files at the top level in
SVN.
May I suggest resolving this via Legal discuss?
It's also pretty easy to add the two files to SVN...
Nice to have but, as I think Guillaume pointed out, still an evolving
issue. Certainly not deserving a veto.
AFIAK, releases can't be vetoed. So if enough folks think this release
is good to go, it is good to go.
From the voting policy [1]:
<snip>
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.
</snip>
Please note the *Releases may not be vetoed.* part.
Martijn
[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
Thanks. My bad. I should have not used to word, veto.
I, along with Guillaume, enjoin Sebb to reconsider his vote which
seems to be based on preferences and not policy. Preferences are the
purvey of the project community, not the Incubator PMC, and should be
worked out in the former, not during a vote.
The Incubator needs to minimize the laborious nature of releases while
focusing on IP clearance and community health.
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
