couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Amend CouchDB bylaws
Date Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:15:29 GMT
+1

Cheers
Jan
--

> On 28.07.2014, at 20:14, Robert Samuel Newson <rnewson@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> +1 to that clarification.
> 
>> On 28 Jul 2014, at 19:07, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Joan, for clarification, I've not made the edit. I put it in the
>> errata. If everyone on this thread is happy with me making the
>> addition of "single" as previously explained, I will do so. But I'll
>> need everyone who's already voted to say they're happy with that.
>> 
>> That would be changing:
>> 
>> "A -1 vote is never called a veto except when using the RTC approval
>> model. This is because a -1 vote never has the power to block a vote
>> outside of RTC."
>> 
>> To this:
>> 
>> "A -1 vote is never called a veto except when using the RTC approval
>> model. This is because a single -1 vote never has the power to block a
>> vote outside of RTC."
>> 
>>> On 28 July 2014 19:28, Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:
>>> With this modification, I concur. +1 on these changes, and thanks for
>>> getting this and the minor errata from others merged into a single vote
>>> so promptly!
>>> 
>>> -Joan
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Noah Slater" <nslater@apache.org>
>>> To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
>>> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 12:58:49 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Amend CouchDB bylaws
>>> 
>>> Dang. Where I say that a -1 never has the power to block a vote, I
>>> really mean a *single* -1 vote. Of course, -1 votes can still block a
>>> vote if you have enough of them. The point is that they're not vetos
>>> 
>>> I don't think this is enough for me to abort the vote, as the rules
>>> are quite clear in the approval models section. This only serves as a
>>> clarification of the statement that a -1 vote is not *called* a veto
>>> outside of RTC.
>>> 
>>> If you think this is important enough to restart the vote, I shall do so.
>>> 
>>> In the mean time, I have created an Errata document:
>>> 
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COUCHDB/Errata
>>> 
>>>> On 28 July 2014 18:25, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Sensible. Thanks for catching this!
>>>> 
>>>> +1
>>>> 
>>>> Best
>>>> Jan
>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>>> On 28.07.2014, at 16:55, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hello folks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> In a discussion between myself, Joan, and Bob on IRC today, it became
>>>>> clear that there are some major errors that need fixing ASAP.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here's my candidate doc that we are voting on:
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=44302814
>>>>> 
>>>>> This vote uses majority approval model and expires in 72 hours.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please review and cast your vote.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The page history is messy, but here is a list of the changes I made,
>>>>> in order of importance. The last half are a wrap-up of all the
>>>>> outstanding errata.
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Dropped "majority approval" approval model, as this allowed blocking
>>>>> -1 votes on non-technical decisions. Confirmed with other major
>>>>> contributors to the bylaws that this did not match our intentions
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Updated decision table to use "lazy majority" or "lazy 2/3 majority"
>>>>> instead of "majority approval" as necessary
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Clarified that "veto" only applies to -1 votes using RTC
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Change our most preferred method of decision making to "Lazy
>>>>> consensus or RTC" per Bob's feedback that we actually have two primary
>>>>> decision making models, one for code and one for everything else
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Dropped a redundant sentence about the Chair not being a leader
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Changed "RTC Approval & Vetos" to "RTC and Vetos" so anchors work
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Fixed internal anchors, and added a few additional ones
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Added example about using email TAGS
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Tightened up wording about the PMC delegating responsibility
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Minor fixes for wording and case
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Noah Slater
>>>>> https://twitter.com/nslater
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Noah Slater
>>> https://twitter.com/nslater
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Noah Slater
>> https://twitter.com/nslater
> 

Mime
View raw message