couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <>
Subject Re: [NOTICE] Updated Bylaws - final readthrough before vote
Date Fri, 18 Jul 2014 21:26:46 GMT
I’m really happy with the current form of the bylaws, thanks everyone!

I did some nitpicky updates (clarifications, cross referencing etc. :
that do *not* change any semantics.

On CTR (commit-then-review): it’s a leftover from the cvs/svn days, in our git world, what
was equivalent to commit in the old model is merge to master (and release branches) in ours.
And for that we do distinctly follow review-then-commit (
to ensure to the highest degree that master and release branches are always in a shippable/stable
state. Git, branches and our merge procedure make all this not much of a problem that it was
in the old cvs/svn days. I wonder then, if we should reword the CTR section to reflect our
situation? (Even if committing to, say, a feature branch, that then is reviewed before it
is merged into master or a release branch could be seen as CTR, it is not quite capturing
the same intent).


On 18 Jul 2014, at 22:16 , Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:

> On 17 Jul 2014, at 06:23 , Joan Touzet <> wrote:
>> After discussion with Noah Slater today, and as discussed in the CouchDB
>> IRC meeting today, I will be driving the bylaws and CoC through to votes
>> and formal adoption.
>> Based on unaddressed comments in the previous mailing list discussion, I
>> have updated the proposed bylaws text. Those updates are here:
>> Changes made since the last version can be viewed here:
>> The primary changes were:
>> 1. Bolded text now serves as a intro guide for new participants and
>>    highlights the important points of which they should be aware.
>>    This should make absorbing the long document easier for newcomers.
>> 2. Reworked text in the veto section to clarify misinterpretations.
>>    There *are* some semantic changes here, so please re-read this
>>    section carefully.
>> 3. Compromise on the COPDOC section: acronym removed, concept remains.
>> 4. Various grammar edits for clarity.
>> At this point, the bylaws are mostly stable, but there may remain some
>> tweaks to the text necessary to ensure they match how we have been
>> running the project for some time now. We (the PMC) acknowledge that
>> they are not perfect, but we do not want to let the perfect to be the
>> enemy of the good (thanks to Voltaire), so we're moving ahead with them
>> in the state they're in.
>> Further, use of these bylaws, or especially any loopholes or imprecise
>> language therein, as a weapon against others acting in good faith is
>> neither within the spirit of the bylaws themselves nor considered
>> acceptable behaviour - and will be dealt with accordingly by the PMC.
> ^-- this paragraph might be worth adding to the bylaws.
> Best
> Jan
> --
>> It is my intent to call a formal vote on these bylaws as of Monday, June
>> 21. PLEASE take the time to make a final read-through and get any
>> corrections to me before then.
>> Per the proposed terms in the bylaws, this non-technical vote will
>> be by majority approval with no vetos allowed. Further, ALL ACTIVE
>> COMMITTERS are respectfully asked to cast their vote at that time.
>> -Joan Touzet

View raw message