Justin is very accurate, that the -1 is a vote and not a veto. We don't want to block releases just because someone didn't get the right coffee that morning.
However (also implied by J) some such votes should be asserted as if vetoed with the usual attribution to "why?", which has happened by for instance Category X dependency noticed by someone in last minute review (perhaps transitively, which happens more and more as the GitHub crowd barely cares about it). As project matures, less and less of these instances tend to occur, and that is why we have the incubator (and big awesome thanks to Justin vetting so many releases!) This is seldom (if ever) a problem since the valid reasons are solidly agreed upon, unlike some code changes. Cheers Niclas On Dec 20, 2016 14:28, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > Thank you John for reviewing the release. From the following links we > > understood that we need at least 3 binding votes and with no vetoes for > > release approval. > > You can have -1 votes but they are not a veto as releases cannot be > vetoed. You just need 3 +1 votes and more +1’s than -1s. [1] That being > said people normally vote -1 for a good reason and you may want to look > into it. > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
