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 busbey@cloudera.com designates
 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAL5zq9a5my3BoHguVv2AKJEx1tuYZrTp1ZUvJcrMorbs70nRNg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAL5zq9Y3Owj7dUd_ZZyhdGGZ7FQ+79ufgcLORJjjzUmMckBrsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPMpPc7iBp0TkWNLkU4ez+ODngo=RVvNG=yn8OFMjT813Sj24A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL5zq9a5my3BoHguVv2AKJEx1tuYZrTp1ZUvJcrMorbs70nRNg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 08:34:54 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <CAGHyZ6KRo99wdtxU58bkqvQ4veENNxUZ9-_BviPmBHyOi66K9A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] API release policy for 1.7/2.0
To: "dev@accumulo apache. org" <dev@accumulo.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2f210799af4050950c06e

--001a11c2f210799af4050950c06e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Adam Fuchs <afuchs@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > It seems to me like concensus instead of majority vote is preferable in
> the
> > case of exceptions.
> >
> >
> Maybe. it depends on the nature of the objection. if it's a routine
> release-planning thing, then majority might suffice. Consensus might be
> required if a change is objected/veto'd. I don't consider how to handle
> exceptions part of the above guidelines, upon which we are voting. I only
> wanted to express that I think that some exceptions might need further
> discussion beyond the guidelines.
>
>

I don't think we should vary the voting based on the objection. That's just
asking for arguments about what kind of objection is being raised. If this
vote is Majority Approval, then the subsequent vote should also be Majority
Approval.

-- 
Sean

--001a11c2f210799af4050950c06e--