accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From dlmar...@comcast.net
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Define CTR in Bylaws
Date Fri, 04 Apr 2014 16:32:59 GMT
include a time for review in the release process. Anyone can raise an objection at that time.
If there is no objection, release plan moves forward. If objection, discuss, and vote if necessary.



----- Original Message -----

From: "John Vines" <vines@apache.org> 
To: "Accumulo Dev List" <dev@accumulo.apache.org> 
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2014 12:19:31 PM 
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Define CTR in Bylaws 

In the bylaw discussion, we had discussed the potential for someone to 
reject a commit as a method to reject a release. Is this something that we 
want to guard against with every release (if possible, we may need to 
provide this ability in the bylaws) or should there be language in our 
definitions to handle it? 


On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote: 

> As previously stated, I like this proposed change and would vote in favor 
> of it. 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Billie Rinaldi <billie.rinaldi@gmail.com 
> >wrote: 
> 
> > This is a proposal to adequately describe our Commit-Then-Review process 
> in 
> > the bylaws. I have made an initial suggestion below. If we can agree on 
> > how to make this clarification, presumably this change would be made 
> > instead of removing the Code Change action from the bylaws (or would 
> > involve adding Code Change back in, if it happens that that change has 
> > already taken place). 
> > 
> > 
> > Index: bylaws.mdtext 
> > ============================== 
> > ===================================== 
> > --- bylaws.mdtext (revision 1584734) 
> > +++ bylaws.mdtext (working copy) 
> > @@ -125,8 +125,15 @@ 
> > 
> > All participants in the Accumulo project are encouraged to vote. For 
> > technical decisions, only the votes of active committers are binding. 
> > Non-binding votes are still useful for those with binding votes to 
> > understand the perception of an action across the wider Accumulo 
> community. 
> > For PMC decisions, only the votes of active PMC members are binding. 
> > 
> > -Voting can also be applied to changes to the Accumulo codebase. Please 
> > refer to the Accumulo commit and review standard for details. 
> > +See the [voting page](http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/voting.html 
> ) 
> > for more details on the mechanics of voting. 
> > 
> > +<a name="CTR"></a> 
> > +## Commit Then Review (CTR) 
> > + 
> > +Voting can also be applied to changes to the Accumulo codebase. Under 
> the 
> > Commit Then Review policy, committers can make changes to the codebase 
> > without seeking approval beforehand, and the changes are assumed to be 
> > approved unless an objection is raised. Only if an objection is raised 
> must 
> > a vote must take place on the code change. 
> > + 
> > +For some code changes, committers may wish to get feedback from the 
> > community before making the change. It is acceptable for a committer to 
> > seek approval before making a change if they so desire. 
> > + 
> > ## Approvals 
> > 
> > These are the types of approvals that can be sought. Different actions 
> > require different types of approvals. 
> > @@ -139,7 +146,7 @@ 
> > <tr><td>Majority Approval</td> 
> > <td>A majority approval vote passes with 3 binding +1 votes and more 
> > binding +1 votes than -1 votes.</td> 
> > <tr><td>Lazy Approval (or Lazy Consensus)</td> 
> > - <td>An action with lazy approval is implicitly allowed unless a -1 
> > vote is received, at which time, depending on the type of action, either 
> > majority approval or consensus approval must be obtained.</td> 
> > + <td>An action with lazy approval is implicitly allowed unless a -1 
> > vote is received, at which time, depending on the type of action, either 
> > majority approval or consensus approval must be obtained. Lazy Approval 
> > can be either <em>stated</em> or <em>assumed</em>, as detailed
on the 
> [lazy 
> > consensus page](http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/lazyConsensus.html 
> ) 
> > .</td> 
> > </table> 
> > 
> > ## Vetoes 
> > @@ -152,6 +159,8 @@ 
> > 
> > This section describes the various actions which are undertaken within 
> the 
> > project, the corresponding approval required for that action and those 
> who 
> > have binding votes over the action. It also specifies the minimum length 
> of 
> > time that a vote must remain open, measured in days. In general, votes 
> > should not be called at times when it is known that interested members of 
> > the project will be unavailable. 
> > 
> > +For Code Change actions, a committer may choose to employ assumed or 
> > stated Lazy Approval under the [CTR](#CTR) policy. Assumed Lazy Approval 
> > has no minimum length of time before the change can be made. 
> > + 
> > <table> 
> > <tr><th>Action</th> 
> > <th>Description</th> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sean 
> 


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message