accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Billie Rinaldi <billie.rina...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Accumulo Bylaws - Action changes
Date Fri, 04 Apr 2014 15:45:15 GMT
Except of course my links were bad, I meant to link to
http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/lazyConsensus.html instead of
voting.html.


On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Billie Rinaldi <billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>wrote:

> Let's spend a minute evaluating whether we can easily fix the issues in
> the bylaws, rather than just putting it off.  For example, would the
> following changes address the problem?
>
> 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
> [voting page](http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/voting.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>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:04 AM, John Vines <vines@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> This is a proposal to strike the code change action from the bylaws. This
>> is being requested because there is substantial ambiguity about the
>> standards being declared / whether this should be part of our bylaws and,
>> until these are clarified, should be removed.
>>
>> Specifically, it is the following line which shall be removed
>>
>> Code Change A change made to a codebase of the project. This includes
>> source code, documentation, website content, etc.Lazy approval, moving to
>> consensus approval upon vetoActive committers1
>>
>>
>> The current bylaws are visibile at
>>
>> http://accumulo.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>
>> This vote will be open for 7 days, until 11 April 2014, 15:10 UTC.
>>
>> Upon successful completion of this vote, the first line of the document
>> body
>> will be replaced with "This is version 2 of the bylaws," and the
>> aforementioned line will be removed.
>>
>> This vote requires majority approval to pass: at least 3 +1 votes and more
>> +1
>> than -1's.
>>
>> [ ] +1 - "I approve of these proposed bylaw changes and accept them
>> for the Apache
>> Accumulo project."
>> [ ] +0 - "I neither approve nor disapprove of these proposed bylaw
>> changes,
>> but accept them for the Apache Accumulo project."
>> [ ] -1 - "I do not approve of these proposed bylaw changes and do not
>> accept them for the Apache Accumulo project because..."
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>
>

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