apex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Weise <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Major version change for Apex Library (Malhar)
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2017 16:31:50 GMT
Yes, you would need a separate discussion/vote on changes not being
reflected in master that you make to a branch (current procedure).

Regarding procedural vote, the decision to start development towards new
major release is a longer term decision, not just code change.

https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval

"Refers to a vote (sense 1) which has completed with at least three binding
+1 votes and more +1 votes than -1 votes. ( I.e. , a simple majority with a
minimum quorum of three positive votes.) Note that in votes requiring
majority approval a -1 vote is simply a vote against, not a veto. Compare
Consensus Approval. See also the description of the voting process."


For code modifications the rules are different, -1 is a veto that needs to
have a valid technical reason why the change cannot be made. Otherwise it
is void. None of the -1s in the vote result provide such justification.

Thanks,
Thomas



On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Pramod Immaneni <pramod@datatorrent.com>
wrote:

> Thomas,
>
> Wouldn't you need to call a separate procedural vote for whether changes
> cannot be allowed into 3.x without requiring they be submitted to 4.x as
> there was a disagreement there? Also, I am not sure that the procedural
> vote argument can be used here for 4.x given that it involves modifications
> to existing code. I would say we should drive towards getting a consensus
> by addressing the concerns folks have about 4.x.
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > There wasn't any more discussion on this, so here is the result:
> >
> > 1. Version 4.0 as major version change from 3.x
> > ====================================
> >
> > +1 (7)
> >
> > Thomas Weise (PMC)
> > Ananth G
> > Vlad Rozov (PMC)
> > Munagala Ramanath (committer)
> > Pramod Immaneni (PMC)
> > Sanjay Pujare
> > David Yan (PMC)
> >
> > -1 (3)
> >
> > Amol Kekre (PMC)
> > Sergey Golovko
> > Ashwin Chandra Putta (committer)
> >
> >
> > 2. Version 1.0 with simultaneous change of Maven artifact IDs
> > ===============================================
> >
> > +1 (5)
> >
> > Thomas Weise (PMC)
> > Ananth G
> > Vlad Rozov (PMC)
> > Munagala Ramanath (committer)
> > David Yan (PMC)
> >
> > -1 (5)
> >
> > Pramod Immaneni (PMC)
> > Sanjay Pujare
> > Amol Kekre (PMC)
> > Sergey Golovko
> > Ashwin Chandra Putta (committer)
> >
> >
> > RESULT
> > =======
> >
> > Vote for option 1 (major version 4.x) *passes* with majority rule [1].
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Thomas
> >
> >
> > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Thomas Weise <thw@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > This is to formalize the major version change for Malhar discussed in
> > [1].
> > >
> > > There are two options for major version change. Major version change
> will
> > > rename legacy packages to org.apache.apex sub packages while retaining
> > file
> > > history in git. Other cleanup such as removing deprecated code is also
> > > expected.
> > >
> > > 1. Version 4.0 as major version change from 3.x
> > >
> > > 2. Version 1.0 with simultaneous change of Maven artifact IDs
> > >
> > > Please refer to the discussion thread [1] for reasoning behind both of
> > the
> > > options.
> > >
> > > Please vote on both options. Primary vote for your preferred option,
> > > secondary for the other. Secondary vote can be used when counting
> primary
> > > vote alone isn't conclusive.
> > >
> > > Vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Thomas
> > >
> > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
> bd1db8a2d01e23b0c0ab98a785f6ee
> > > 9492a1ac9e52d422568a46e5f3@%3Cdev.apex.apache.org%3E
> > >
> >
>

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