accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Drob <mad...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Accumulo Bylaws, vote 2
Date Tue, 01 Apr 2014 21:26:40 GMT
I do not like this. It sounds like I can veto a release by putting a veto
on a commit, when we explicitly state that release votes are majority, not
consensus.


On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Billie Rinaldi <billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Bill Havanki <bhavanki@clouderagovt.com
> >wrote:
>
> > First, +1 vote
> >
> > As part of getting us a (literally) passable first set of bylaws as a
> > foundation, at one point I "refactored" the commit and review details out
> > to an as-yet-to-be-written standard. So, what is in the bylaws should be
> > interpreted as permissive.
> >
> > My interpretations: A "code change" can certainly be a commit - "a change
> > made to a codebase of a project". Lazy approval is based on that commit.
> > The minimum voting period (here and for release plan) applies to both
> vote
> > phases separately, so *n* days for lazy approval, *n* days for consensus
> > if needed. (I imagine lazy approval has some period since getting a veto
> > one month later shouldn't be possible, for example; but if that doesn't
> > make sense, never mind. :) )
> >
>
> A change can be vetoed until the code is released. :)
>
>
> >
> > I have all sorts of ideas about the commit and review details, and I bet
> > others do too, which is why I like having that split off from getting
> some
> > version 1 bylaws in place. As the policies evolve, we still have the
> option
> > to modify the bylaws as needed.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 4:40 PM, John Vines <vines@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> The only two places we have a lazy falling back to another type of vote
> is
> >> code change and release plan. For release plan, I interpret the minimum
> >> length to apply to either type of vote. However, you're stating that
> this
> >> is not the case for a code change. So there is ambiguity about minimum
> >> length applying to lazy approvals that needs to be cleared up here.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Billie Rinaldi <
> billie.rinaldi@gmail.com
> >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > The only time there is more than one type of approval (not vote)
> >> required
> >> > is when the first one is lazy consensus, which doesn't actually
> require
> >> a
> >> > vote.  Maybe we just need some elaboration on how to CTR which is
> >> > referenced from this doc ("Please refer to the Accumulo commit and
> >> review
> >> > standard for details")?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:17 PM, John Vines <vines@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> If that is the case, then I think we should provide distinction about
> >> the
> >> >> time lengths between the various types of votes, for the cases where
> >> there
> >> >> are multiple possible votes involved.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Billie Rinaldi <
> >> billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:46 PM, John Vines <vines@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> The way I'm reading actions, all code changes must be presented
at
> >> least
> >> >>>> one day before they can be committed. Is that intended this
way?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I wasn't reading it that way.  Code change is lazy approval, and
"An
> >> >>> action with lazy approval is implicitly allowed unless a -1 vote
is
> >> >>> received."  Not requiring a vote supersedes the minimum vote length.
> >>  In
> >> >>> the event of falling back to consensus approval for code change,
the
> >> >>> minimum vote length is 1 day.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Billie Rinaldi <billie@apache.org>
> >> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> > Hey everyone!  We only have 3 more days to vote on Accumulo's
> >> bylaws
> >> >>>> ...
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Bill Havanki <
> >> >>>> bhavanki@clouderagovt.com
> >> >>>> > >wrote:
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>> > > Please vote on the proposed bylaws, as available
at
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > *
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>>
> >>
> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/accumulo/site/trunk/content/bylaws.mdtext?revision=1582476&view=markup
> >> >>>> > > <
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>>
> >>
> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/accumulo/site/trunk/content/bylaws.mdtext?revision=1582476&view=markup
> >> >>>> > > >*
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > A nicer-to-read version is available at
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > http://accumulo.apache.org/bylaws.html
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > This vote will be open for 7 days, until 4 April
2014 14:00
> UTC.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > Upon successful completion of this vote, the first
line of the
> >> >>>> document
> >> >>>> > > body
> >> >>>> > > will be replaced with "This is version 1 of the bylaws,"
and
> the
> >> >>>> > statement
> >> >>>> > > defining the document as a draft will be stricken.
> Additionally,
> >> a
> >> >>>> link
> >> >>>> > to
> >> >>>> > > the document will be added to the navigation menu.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > This vote requires majority approval to pass: at
least 3 +1
> votes
> >> >>>> and
> >> >>>> > more
> >> >>>> > > +1
> >> >>>> > > than -1's.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > [ ] +1 - "I approve of these proposed bylaws and
accept them
> for
> >> the
> >> >>>> > > Apache Accumulo
> >> >>>> > > project."
> >> >>>> > > [ ] +0 - "I neither approve nor disapprove of these
proposed
> >> >>>> bylaws, but
> >> >>>> > > accept them for the Apache Accumulo project."
> >> >>>> > > [ ] -1 - "I do not approve of these proposed bylaws
and do not
> >> >>>> accept
> >> >>>> > them
> >> >>>> > > for
> >> >>>> > > the Apache Accumulo project because..."
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > Thank you.
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> > > --
> >> >>>> > > // Bill Havanki
> >> >>>> > > // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
> >> >>>> > > // 443.686.9283
> >> >>>> > >
> >> >>>> >
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > // Bill Havanki
> > // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
> > // 443.686.9283
> >
>

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