Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of billie.rinaldi@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.219.54 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAD-fFU+GaTMTkuYYWsefLD0kgXL2pNLO=HckwgXX5rNKOumrpw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAD-fFUKa6t9PZEwFvgaqHeCc8NLegUBwBuSN=t=7mO9FOu3shQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL5zq9Z=E6BwJ5-ySVc+ORTBao1pAgfWUfYtQqOJJ0ULXO-HNA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD-fFU+-TdS+pAcuPwJN3gJUyfwrSAqcVFDzTCH9uCnQxZ3oMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGHyZ6+N48FOX5CYFgpcpRg5CTYyOYG6iQusmE6r6RfDQSyNuA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFAMeYJDwG0xxvyUR+ux+GUEzMHZNx13b_OgpSEb557GnTRJhQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD-fFU+ZjZQMiLWxtoAZrWTVo49C4ujiA9uuh4JvGfakvNri3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGHyZ6La=2FcnxdCrd=iMAc8-R9+hzBS4doAA+ssvnTHCTaJkw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL5zq9aWyUoNhAcQBrrWxj-xM3s39KcLPnAhMFFQ+u7C16_wFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGHyZ6Kk6JyRb=TF4Wi4RdUaGxGRA5iMQ0Eq5EiY3rt6daN-JA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD-fFU+GaTMTkuYYWsefLD0kgXL2pNLO=HckwgXX5rNKOumrpw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 09:57:13 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAF1jEfAFbWg0JyAyRgSHbDncPKqe81KxL6U+iMr=_unCRcMcsA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bylaw edits based on first vote discussion
From: Billie Rinaldi <billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7ba9818c63b29804f5713edb

--047d7ba9818c63b29804f5713edb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I think "the ASF board removes PMC members" is misleading, so I changed it
to "PMC members can only be removed with approval from the ASF Board".  I
also added a bullet under PMC about protecting Apache trademarks, and a
link to the PMC Guide for more detailed information.  Does anyone know what
"Resolving license disputes regarding products of the project" means?  If
not, can we remove this bullet?  I'm not sure which responsibility this is
trying to highlight, so it at least needs clarification.

Otherwise, it seems to be in pretty good shape.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Bill Havanki <bhavanki@clouderagovt.com>wrote:

> I took one more pass through the bylaws. Besides fixing a typo and adding a
> missing comma, the only change I made was to add a "New PMC Chair" voting
> action. This was already defined in the PMC section as requiring consensus
> approval, so I just added a row to the voting action table for it. I set
> the minimum vote period to 3 days, matching the new committer and new PMC
> member actions. A longer period would also be fine IMO.
>
> [Site publishing isn't working for me, but you can see the changes in CMS
> or at the staging URL: http://accumulo.staging.apache.org/bylaws.html]
>
> I'll tentatively plan to call a vote on Thursday. Thanks, everyone!
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey+lists@cloudera.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Excellent. Thank you Christopher!
> >
> > -Sean
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Sean-
> > >
> > > I took care of it; used the neutral "their".
> > >
> > > --
> > > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Sean Busbey <
> busbey+lists@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > I was going rewrite it to use singular they instead of the current
> > > > combination of "his/her" and "his or her". But I haven't found time
> to
> > do
> > > > it yet.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Bill Havanki <
> > bhavanki@clouderagovt.com
> > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I removed the reinstatement voting actions, as discussed earlier in
> > this
> > > >> thread. The actions are now purely "New Committer" and "New PMC
> > Member".
> > > >>
> > > >> I think a diff between the votes is a great idea, easy to do with
> svn.
> > > >>
> > > >> Any other feedback or issues with the proposed bylaws?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > I think at this point, any willing person can make edits. I do not
> > > expect
> > > >> > we will suffer from too many cooks.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For the next vote, it would be a good idea to include a diff to
> the
> > > first
> > > >> > vote.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Sean Busbey <
> > > busbey+lists@cloudera.com
> > > >> > >wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > How are we handling proposed changes? Just post a new version?
> > Email
> > > >> > > description and then some coordinating editor (Bill H?) handles
> > > >> > > implementation?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Bill Havanki <
> > > >> bhavanki@clouderagovt.com
> > > >> > > >wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > I think you are right about the reinstatement actions.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > - If a committer cannot lose status, she cannot be denied
> > getting
> > > the
> > > >> > > > commit bit back / her password reset after going idle /
> > emeritus.
> > > So,
> > > >> > no
> > > >> > > > vote is warranted.
> > > >> > > > - An emeritus PMC member can simply declare that she is back
> via
> > > >> email
> > > >> > > (the
> > > >> > > > bylaws even say so right now).
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Christopher <
> > ctubbsii@apache.org
> > > >
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > Thanks for doing this.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I'm still not sure it makes sense to have "reinstatement"
> even
> > > on
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > > list of voting actions, given that removal is not a possible
> > > thing,
> > > >> > > > > but everything else looks good.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > I'm more comfortable with the release plan being in the
> > initial
> > > >> > > > > bylaws, now that we've discussed what that means, so I'm
> glad
> > > you
> > > >> > > > > included that stuff.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > > >> > > > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Bill Havanki <
> > > >> > > bhavanki@clouderagovt.com
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > Hello all,
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I have updated our proposed bylaws to account for feedback
> > > that
> > > >> > arose
> > > >> > > > > from
> > > >> > > > > > the first vote. Here is the link:
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > http://accumulo.apache.org/bylaws.html
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > The following is a summary of my updates. There was a lot
> of
> > > >> > > > (excellent)
> > > >> > > > > > discussion, so please do point out unintentional
> omissions,
> > > >> > > > > > misinterpretations, or errors that are somewhat likely to
> be
> > > >> there.
> > > >> > > :)
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > - Fixed punctuation errors and typos noticed by
> Christopher.
> > > >> > > > > > - Voting action changes:
> > > >> > > > > >   - Noted that new actions may be added as needed to the
> > list
> > > >> > > > > >   - Changed the release plan action to lazy consensus,
> > falling
> > > >> back
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > > > > majority approval)
> > > >> > > > > >   - Added release plan cancellation (re-plan) action,
> > majority
> > > >> > > approval
> > > >> > > > > >   - Clarified difference between release plan and product
> > > release
> > > >> > > > actions
> > > >> > > > > >   - Defined "codebase" using Mike's definition
> > > >> > > > > >   - Noted that committer and PMC removal actions are
> > > >> intentionally
> > > >> > > not
> > > >> > > > > > defined, with references
> > > >> > > > > > - Added release manager role section
> > > >> > > > > > - Added release plan section, with content definition
> based
> > on
> > > >> > Mike's
> > > >> > > > > list
> > > >> > > > > >   - Noted specifically that dates in release plans are
> > > estimates
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I punted on laying out release guidelines, as we have a
> page
> > > for
> > > >> > > those
> > > >> > > > > [1]
> > > >> > > > > > that I could defer to.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > I also punted on version numbering, just for now. As with
> > > other
> > > >> > > > issues, I
> > > >> > > > > > can certainly see that as a worthwhile later addition.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Thank you in advance for reviewing. I'm hopeful that we
> can
> > > call
> > > >> a
> > > >> > > > second
> > > >> > > > > > vote by next week.
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > [1] http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/releasing.html
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > // Bill Havanki
> > > >> > > > > > // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
> > > >> > > > > > // 443.686.9283
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > --
> > > >> > > > // Bill Havanki
> > > >> > > > // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
> > > >> > > > // 443.686.9283
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> // Bill Havanki
> > > >> // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
> > > >> // 443.686.9283
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Bill Havanki
> // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
> // 443.686.9283
>

--047d7ba9818c63b29804f5713edb--