> What’s our goal here? My goal is to make Incubation a little less miserable.
Of course releases need to meet ASF policy. And of course podlings need to graduate with the skills/knowledge to function as top-level projects. But the Incubator has habits and traditions that go far beyond ASF policy. The “vote” I referred to is the IPMC voting to change IPMC policy. I don’t recall the IPMC ever voting on policy. It’s a shame that a “-1” from Justin and a few citations of existing policy tend to cause discussions to fizzle out. Release votes require a plurality of 3, while votes on policy (if we ever had them) require a simple majority. Tison’s proposal for concurrent release votes seems to me a good one. Let’s vote on it. Julian > On Sep 4, 2026, at 7:56 AM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi - > > I’d like to raise a couple of related points. > >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 6:03 PM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> To solve this issue, we will need to make some compromises. I would like to >> see this discussion ending in a vote — if necessary more than one — where >> IPMC members put their opinions on record. > > Culturally in Incubator VOTEs we treat a -1 (binding) as a VETO. This should > not be the case. Please reread https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > carefully. > > In that spirit many of the things that are wrong in one release should be > fixed in the next release. In that spirit we created the DISCLAIMER-WIP and I > think that this should become the standard DISCLAIMER. > > We can make a clean release a clear graduation requirement. > > What’s our goal here? > > Best, > Dave --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
