On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> 72h for a vote is not a hard and fast rule (you just need a good reason for
> why you are going shorter and from what I have seen, the board would
> probably be ok as long as protections are put in place to safeguard the
> community)
By no
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> So it's not true to say that 'community over code' precludes this.
> Some communities have chosen this.
+1 high-cadence releasing should be a community decision.
> All the remarks about code quality and stability are, I think, off
> topic
But what if the community wants Apache to have such a rapid cadence?
By forcing the community to decamp to GitHub, then what are we saying to
that community? Sorry we may value community over code, but we value
procedure over both?
If that is the answer, then so be it, let's change our mantra fro
If you want to have a faster release cadence, then I think the answer is
for _you_ (not Apache) to have a faster release cadence. It seems easy to
look at Apache rules for releases and Linux rules for releases (as an
underpinning for the features found in Git) and treat them as incompatible,
but I
What I see here is a disagreement about the meaning of the Apache
brand. Some people feel that the Apache brand should always imply a
particular style of project. Other people in the past have written at
length that the ASF should be a big tent that accommodates many styles
of project. There are al
