On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 2:00 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> Previously there was a clear rule
> 1.) do the internal vote and if that succeeds
> 2.) do another VOTE on the general@incubator list.
That's still the rule.
The wider Incubator PMC must be given full opportunity to review any release.
The 2013 Alternate Release Voting Process is not being used right now, but
even if it was, a VOTE on general@incubator would still be required.
The "send a summary" phrase in the documentation for the Alternate process was
deliberately copied from the original text to avoid changing any more than
necessary.
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
Original:
If the majority of all votes is positive, then the Podling SHALL send
a summary of that vote to the Incubator's general list and formally
request the Incubator PMC approve such a release.
Alternate:
If the majority of PPMC votes is positive, then the Podling SHALL send
a summary of that vote to the Incubator's general list and formally
request the Incubator PMC approve such a release.
It is not sufficient to "send a summary". The podling needs to "formal
request that the Incubator PMC approve" -- i.e. call a VOTE on
general@incubator. The criteria for passing differ under the Alternate
process, but the general@incubator VOTE has to happen regardless.
Now, we tend to "forward" IPMC votes from the podling dev list, which is
arguably confusing because it doesn't follow the letter of the law. But I
sure hope nobody wants to start failing release VOTEs because some IPMC member
voted only on the PPMC thread.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
