flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kostas Tzoumas <ktzou...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Community & Committing rules
Date Fri, 05 Sep 2014 12:33:37 GMT
+1 for not requiring a vote thread unless someone asks for it


On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetzger@apache.org> wrote:

> I agree with Stephan: If somebody wants to do a major change and is
> uncertain if the community is willing to accept the change, they can ask on
> the mailing list about it.
>
> I would rather go with Stephan's suggestion to just drop a mail on the dev@
> list, without a formal vote. If there is a disagreement or somebody asks
> for a vote, we can still start a vote. This is how I perceived this project
> since it entered the incubator.
>
> I'm against the explicit requirement for a vote (this is how I understood
> Marton) because it would make things too complicated (working on Flink
> should be fun, not a highly regulated process).
>
>
> I'm against adding the community rules into the "How to Contrib". Its such
> an important topic that we should dedicate a separate page on that (the
> internet is already so huge, this one page won't hurt). Having such a page
> also shows the IPMC that our community is healthy.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1 but I would say not the Wiki, but the How To Contribute guide.
> >
> > @Marton: do you have a link for the mail vote befor major changes. In any
> > case, for me it doesn't matter whether it is a vote or a light weight
> mail
> > to the dev list.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Márton Balassi <balassi.marton@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'd prefer the mail vote before major changes (this is also the
> preferred
> > > Apache guideline if I'm not mistaken).
> > >
> > > Writing down the basics on a wiki makes it clearer and also easier for
> > new
> > > contributors to get involved. This page is somewhat related though (at
> > > least for voting):
> > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > I think part of the discussion that arose around the proposed
> > Java/Scala
> > > > and RPC/Akka changes comes from the fact that we have not clearly
> > written
> > > > down the community/committing rules anywhere yet. In particular, how
> do
> > > we
> > > > treat proposed major changes.
> > > >
> > > > Most of us (including me) worked under the assumption that committers
> > can
> > > > commit small fixes immediately, and those can be vetoed (reverted) in
> > > > hind-sight by others (has not yet happened, though).
> > > >
> > > > Anything that has impact on other people goes through pull requests,
> > and
> > > is
> > > > then discussed upon, revised, or rejected. This seems to be the model
> > > that
> > > > many other Apache projects use (like Mahout for example, Sebastian,
> > > correct
> > > > my if I am wrong there).
> > > >
> > > > That has seemed to work so far, and in that sense, the use of Akka
> for
> > > > example is still a proposal only.
> > > >
> > > > For major refactorings like the RPC/Actor one, it makes sense to try
> > and
> > > > reach consensus before the implementation effort, because it is too
> > much
> > > > work to do it without knowing that it will be accepted. This may be a
> > > vote,
> > > > but I would prefer it to be rather lightweight, like dropping a mail
> on
> > > the
> > > > dev list, giving people an early chance to voice concerns.
> > > >
> > > > Does it make sense to write these simple rules down somewhere
> (wiki?),
> > so
> > > > that it is transparent?
> > > >
> > > > Stephan
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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