tika-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jukka Zitting" <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com>
Subject On voting (Was: [Release Candidate] 0.1-incubating)
Date Sat, 29 Dec 2007 12:24:44 GMT
Hi,

On Dec 28, 2007 10:32 PM, Keith R. Bennett <kbennett@bbsinc.biz> wrote:
> BTW, I may not have the time to thoroughly review the release candidates.
> What level of confidence do you suggest as a criterion for voting?  (In
> other words, if I take a brief look, and it looks ok, would you like me to
> vote +1, or only vote +1 if I review the release candidate thoroughly?)

There are no strict guidelines on how a (P)PMC member should vote
(otherwise we could just automate the process :-). Instead each member
is expected to apply whatever technical and procedural quality
criteria they think should apply to a release. The release candidate
should also be audited for compliance with Apache policies (see [1]
and [2]), but the extent of such audit is left to each PMC member to
decide.

By voting +1 you basically state that you've looked at the candidate
and don't see any obvious flaws in it. A -1 vote requires also an
explanation of a valid issue in the release candidate. The requirement
of three +1 votes for a release guarantees that at least three pairs
of eyes have looked a the candidate and found no obvious issues, so on
aggregate we can be reasonably sure that the release is OK. Notably a
-1 vote on technical issues (like a bug not being fixed or a feature
not included in a release) will not veto a release, but a qualified
legal or policy issue should be treated as a veto.

Some time ago I wrote a release auditing guide for Jackrabbit that you
may also find useful, see [3].

[1] http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases
[2] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
[3] http://markmail.org/message/zsjhrvgpnd3ouhi5

On Dec 29, 2007 3:09 AM, Keith R. Bennett <kbennett@bbsinc.biz> wrote:
> The +1 was for the quoted text, that we vote on something that has been
> frozen, for the reasons given by others.

Please avoid posting unrelated +1s or -1s on vote threads.

This is another good reason to scrap and restart all vote threads that
become discussions. Optimally, a vote thread only consists of the call
to vote, a sequence of votes, and the tallied result. Related
discussions are best branched off to separate threads by modifying the
subject line (see this message).

BR,

Jukka Zitting

Mime
View raw message