From dev-return-48698-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@couchdb.apache.org Tue Jul 30 14:25:44 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [207.244.88.153]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 74BC1180607 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 16:25:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 84675 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jul 2019 14:25:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 84664 invoked by uid 99); 30 Jul 2019 14:25:42 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 14:25:42 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1A166C2DE9 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 14:25:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.25 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.25 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-ec2-va.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eG9lB2S5EOuQ for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 14:25:39 +0000 (UTC) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.210.49; helo=mail-ot1-f49.google.com; envelope-from=wendallc@83864.com; receiver= Received: from mail-ot1-f49.google.com (mail-ot1-f49.google.com [209.85.210.49]) by mx1-ec2-va.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-ec2-va.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 74A33BC7B3 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 14:25:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot1-f49.google.com with SMTP id l15so9237870oth.7 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 07:25:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=7xRU6+BpRWIx9PiZHJZ9Jf6Y2PtmnZYG6xNGyZj1Umg=; b=g/1N6cAafBxMk+YkqPJIpP4w+r5rZ7PxPxTZJuACvT6gXTRNg09NZGy8KOnibEd4kZ N8TeCnEymtaJKAgec87Eg0Rw1BaaZZDCMyJn3KVTWta0tsSKKTGVgIuV+fLJULmYDI1b HWA4Vq+6Y2wpLhH+SyLP+jDqIVCIr35RjHXLImZiKoJdT/AJfvO/CBtbZcAneHyctFEY pl7R7TLvt3E/Q0WqGHOkmLyio2TJsuCvuvPSFW/YMZzs3pfMovOn5Zkpy2avOwzyMXqc +3MWY56Ak1HgcUEKZW83u5wRNya4Jtm3JUKCUoG7at53WK+t7JIRZsym4WKpm2oZcS8T bo7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWX7DdrRMGgMvsyO3RgWPAwA7ZXXQCX4vaJSFiEzhDlUAW7atij pB3mxbsypeVEImFJLhEwu8ItreATG5mLJdBSj/bNss2j X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzEs30uv0M4ENeNdRXEK1gLEvUBKjqoKN7wIkUAGgpVcahMXXlWyls5rwWa7bWPdInrwBKmypgtfl6/PSSJ1l4= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6f03:: with SMTP id n3mr53882414otq.283.1564496732641; Tue, 30 Jul 2019 07:25:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <54751AA3-8684-48C2-A7FF-FB3DC160F172@apache.org> In-Reply-To: From: Wendall Cada Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2019 07:25:21 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] Adopt FoundationDB To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000007ada058ee6c820" --000000000000007ada058ee6c820 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1 On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 7:08 AM Adam Kocoloski wrote: > +1 > > > On Jul 30, 2019, at 4:27 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > > > > Dear CouchDB developers, > > > > This vote decides whether the CouchDB project accepts the proposal[1] > > to switch our underlying storage and distributed systems technology out > > for FoundationDB[2]. > > > > At the outset, we said that we wanted to cover these topic areas before > > making a vote: > > > > - Bylaw changes > > - RFC process: done, passed > > - Add qualified vote option: done, changes proposed were not > > ratified > > > > - Roadmap: proposal done, detailed discussions TBD, includes > > deprecations > > > > - Onboarding: ASF onboarding links shared, CouchDB specific onboarding > > TBD. > > > > - (Re-)Branding: tentatively: 3.0 is the last release before FDB > > CouchDB and 4.0 is the FDB CouchDB. If we need nicknames, we can > > decide on those later. > > > > - FoundationDB Governance: FoundationDB is currently loosely organised > > between Apple and a few key stakeholder companies invested in the > > technology. Apple contributions are trending downwards relatively, > > approaching 50%, which means in the future, more non-Apple than Apple > > contributions are likely. > > > > In addition, the CouchDB PMC has requested addition to the current > > organisational FDB weekly meeting, which is where any more formal > > governance decisions are going to be made and the CouchDB PMC can be > > a part of the surrounding discussions. > > > > - FoundationDB Operations knowledge: IBM has intends to share this > > knowledge as they acquire it in conjunction with Apache CouchDB in > > terms of general ops knowledge, best practices and tooling. > > > > - Proj. Mgmt.: RFC process + outline list of TBD RFCs allow for enough > > visibility and collaboration opportunities, everyone on dev@ list is > > encouraged to participate. > > > > - Tech deep dives: DISCUSS threads and RFCs are covering this, current > > list of TBD DISCUSS/RFCs, for the proposal. Most of which were > > already discussed on dev@ or RFC=E2=80=99d in our documentation repo: > > > > * JSON doc storage and storage of edit conflicts > > * revision management > > * _changes feed > > * _db_updates > > * _all_docs > > * database creation and deletion > > * attachments > > * mango indexes (including collation) > > * map-only views / search / geo > > * reduces > > * aggregate metrics (data_size, etc.) > > * release engineering > > * local/desktop/dev install security > > > > * * * > > > > As shown above, all topics we wanted to have clarity on have been > > advanced to a point where we are now ready to make a decision: > > > > Should Apache CouchDB adopt FoundationDB? > > > > Since this is a big decision, I suggest we make this a Lazy 2/3 > > Majority Vote with PMC Binding Votes, and a 7 day duration (as per our > > bylaws[3]). > > > > You can cast your votes now. > > > > Best > > Jan > > =E2=80=94 > > [1]: > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04e7889354c077a6beb91fd1292b6d38b7a3= f2c6a5dc7d20f5b87c44@%3Cdev.couchdb.apache.org%3E > > [2]: https://www.foundationdb.org > > [3]: https://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html > > > > > > --000000000000007ada058ee6c820--