On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:20 AM Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> ... > This does NOT mean that the IPMC should be gatekeepers though... Just as > PMC chairs are the "eyes and ears of the board", mentors are the "eyes and > ears of the IPMC". The IPMC "vote" should be little more than a formality. > IMO, if mentors are IPMC members, and there are at least 3 binding votes on > the podling list, and the mentors are acting as IPMC members when they > vote, then any other additional vote in the IPMC is not required... in > essence, consider it like extending the vote for a lazy consensus, so to > speak: > > > "The Apache Podling Foo has voted on releasing Foo 1.2.2 (url and > pointers here). We have 3 (or more) binding votes from mentors. We are > giving the IPMC and additional 72 hours to vote on said release." > This is good in theory, but as Justin has pointed out, 90% of podling releases don't have enough mentor votes to follow this path. The 10% that do have enough votes can easily follow this process.
