Re: [technology-pmc] sphinx build CQ?

[Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@xxxxxxxxx>]

Note the UI confuses you by automatically advancing you to the "next" issue :D

Your CQ is currently marked as New (which I assume it shows up in Sharon's TODO box).

On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

This email discussion is all you need, add a +1 and fill in the comment pointing to the archived mailing list discussion.

1. Start here: https://locationtech.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc

2. Go to archive: https://locationtech.org/mhonarc/lists/technology-pmc/

3. Find discussion: https://locationtech.org/mhonarc/lists/technology-pmc/msg00033.html

4. In the CQ change status to +

5. Added a comment: technolog-pmc discussion: https://locationtech.org/mhonarc/lists/technology-pmc/msg00033.html

5. Hit the button to "Issues Addressed, return CQ to IPTeam"

So yeah only +1 seems to be needed (or available), just returning it to the IPTeam is needed.

On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Frank Gasdorf <fgdrf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Actually the current status is "awaiting_pmc", Means you and the other PMC's should add your "+" in Flags of the CQ. The discussion thread you can find here : https://locationtech.org/mhonarc/lists/technology-pmc/msg00025.html

You are correct, we still need it as build dependency. I started an other try before submitting CQ 7449 but I used the an older sphinx version number :( (CQ 7447 which I have withdrawn by myself)

Currently I have no idea how to get from awaiting_pmc to the next level. Do you? How many votes are required? Is there  a weekly/monthly review procedure of CQ's in general?

HTH

Frank

2013/8/5 Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@xxxxxxxxx>

Hi Frank:

I think I missed something, the sphinx build dependency looks to be withdrawn (https://dev.eclipse.org/ipzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7449)?

But I missed the reasoning - as far as I can tell we still want it as a build dependency right?

-- 

Jody Garnett