Hi Andrus,
Yes, there is a difference between consensus to make a release (begin
the release process) and approval of a release (after the release
artifacts are available for testing etc.).
I'd suggest using the [VOTE] subject only for the approval. Seems
like lazy consensus is sufficient to begin the process. If there is a
need to get lots of input to begin, you might tag the discussion
thread with [DISCUSS], but that's just to call attention to the mail...
Craig
On Jan 4, 2007, at 5:37 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Another note (something I overlooked, getting too excited about the
> first release from Apache and all that). We'll still have to do all
> the due diligence once the release artifacts are posted, ensuring
> that (a) they work and (b) there are no legal issues, like missing
> license headers and all that.
>
> So we will have another (consequential) vote once a release admin
> (I guess that's me at the moment) posts the release files.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2007, at 3:29 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
>> Okay. I'm throwing my +1 into the ring then, for both releases.
>>
>> --
>> Kevin
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org]
>>> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 8:17 AM
>>> To: cayenne-de..ncubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: [VOTE] Re: Cayenne 2.0.2 (and 1.2.2)
>>>
>>>> (That's +1 from me, but I'd also like to do a formal vote
>>> thread once
>>>> we see that there is a consensus)
>>>
>>> The way it goes, this might as well be considered a vote
>>> thread, so I am renaming it for easier identification.
>>>
>>> Andrus
>>
>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russel..un.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Jan 04 2007 - 13:36:22 EST