[GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] RFC4 discussion call
Michael.Barton at asu.edu
Mon Dec 29 17:49:04 PST 2014
I agree. Even if we cannot get time to look at it, we can at least check in and say that.
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
voice: 480-965-6262 (SHESC), 480-965-8130/727-9746 (CSDC)
fax: 480-965-7671 (SHESC), 480-727-0709 (CSDC)
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton, http://csdc.asu.edu
> On Dec 29, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Helena Mitasova <hmitaso at ncsu.edu> wrote:
> I agree with Maris that no feedback should be interpreted as agreement.
> A statement : "if there are no further comments or feedback for the 7 days, RC1 will be released on XXX date"
> may help in case somebody has some issues and was just delaying posting them.
> Also for the PSC, it appears that the release procedure is ready to be voted on?
> On Dec 29, 2014, at 3:11 AM, Maris Nartiss wrote:
>> IMHO "lack of answer" in a transparent procedure with reasonable
>> response windows just means "carry on, everyone agrees". Having a
>> fixed last date for comments might force someone to say something (or
>> used as an argument for STFU later).
>> Just my 0.02,
>> 2014-12-29 9:50 GMT+02:00 Markus Neteler <neteler at osgeo.org>:
>>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Moritz Lennert
>>> <mlennert at club.worldonline.be> wrote:
>>>> On 24/11/14 14:38, Martin Landa wrote:
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>> as we are closer and closer to GRASS 7 release I would like to open
>>>>> discussion related to "Release procedure" - RFC4 . Ideally (I would
>>>>> say) it would make sense to find a way how accept such procedure
>>>>> before we start with GRASS RCs...
>>>>> Thanks for your feedback in advance! Martin
>>>>>  http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/RFC/4_ReleaseProcedure
>>>> Rereading it I found parts that didn't seem clear, so I reordered the
>>>> sentences slightly to make the meaning clearer.
>>> While this is all nice, I am strongly lacking support in the day to
>>> day release management.
>>> Again the RC1 feedback is actually 0 (zero).
>>> The "General Procedure" in the document is lacking answers to what to
>>> do if no or no reasonable feedback occurs.
>>> Any ideas? We are in soft freeze for months.
>>> grass-dev mailing list
>>> grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> grass-dev mailing list
>> grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> grass-psc mailing list
> grass-psc at lists.osgeo.org
More information about the grass-psc