groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Support Java-like array
Date Tue, 15 May 2018 06:34:47 GMT
Cédric,

Should the voting period be extended for this vote?

Remko 


> On May 15, 2018, at 15:07, Cédric Champeau <cedric.champeau@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I can say why I didn't vote: I didn't have time to review the proposal and its consequences,
so I don't want to give a blind +1 or -1.
> 
>> Le mar. 15 mai 2018 à 08:03, mg <mgbiz@arscreat.com> a écrit :
>> What I meant to say yesterday at 1am was: "On the other hand I do not get why only
2 PMC members have been voting +1 on this proposal..."
>> 
>> This is not against voting +0, but about why so few PMC members vote at all... (?)
>> 
>> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
>> Von: MG <mgbiz@arscreat.com>
>> Datum: 15.05.18 00:57 (GMT+01:00)
>> An: dev@groovy.apache.org, Paul King <paulk@asert.com.au>
>> Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Support Java-like array 
>> 
>> My 10 cents:
>> [VOTE][LAZY] seems a bit odd - if PMC members are on vacation/ill/afk one person
could basically push through sweeping changes, which seems odd.
>> On the other had I do not get why only 2 PMC members have been voting on this proposal
- if you do not care either way, and it already has 2 x +1, just push it over the edge, if
you are really against it, shoot it down with -1...
>> Cheers,
>> mg
>> 
>> 
>>> On 13.05.2018 10:57, Paul King wrote:
>>> My understanding is that there is some flexibility when asking for votes so long
as it is clear up front what the expectation is, see e.g. [1]. Even though there are numerous
generic Apache sites with similar descriptions, I was thinking of adding some more content
in some of our pages to summarise the most relevant information for our project. I was thinking
of some additional wording to the "Contributing code" section of the website to indicate that
typically committers should be following the same guidelines (creating PRs etc.) for any significant
code change as for people without committer status. Also, I was going to add some wording
somewhere around our typical conventions for voting. Something like:
>>> 
>>> We strongly value keeping consensus within the project. Sometimes consensus is
obvious from general discussions or informal +1s in PRs or Jira issues. For significant changes
within PRs or Jiras, it is good to send an informational to the dev mailing list in any case.
When consensus is not obvious or for potentially                 contentious changes, emails
with a [VOTE] in the subject line are a good way to ascertain consensus. Typical scenarios
are:
>>> * [VOTE] for a release - requires 3 more binding +1 votes than -1 votes (no veto
capability)
>>> * [VOTE] for code change - requires 3 binding +1s but can be vetoed with a single
-1 binding vote
>>> * [VOTE][LAZY] for code change - assumes absence of a vote is a +1 (but you'd
normally want at least one binding +1 so best to wait a bit longer if you don't have at least
one) but can be vetoed with a single -1 binding vote
>>> A committer creating a PR request is similar to [VOTE][LAZY].
>>> 72 hours is the minimum for such votes but there is no maximum time delay - though
waiting too long isn't a good idea since the circumstances which lead to earlier +1s might
have changed.
>>> 
>>> If anyone has improvements for this wording, let me know.
>>> 
>>> [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>> 
>>> Cheers, Paul.
>>> 
>>> On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Remko Popma <remko.popma@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> That’s probably why over at Log4j we use slightly different language for
voting:
>>>> 
>>>> “The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or more if required). At least
3 +1 votes ...”
>>>> 
>>>> It seems unfair that by not participating, it is possible to essentially
vote -0 or -1 without justification...
>>>> 
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> 
>>>> Remko 
>>>> 
>>>> > On May 13, 2018, at 11:48, Daniel.Sun <sunlan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > 
>>>> > Please see my original email:
>>>> > "The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of
at least 
>>>> > three +1 PMC votes are cast."
>>>> > 
>>>> > Cheers,
>>>> > Daniel.Sun
>>>> > 
>>>> > 
>>>> > 
>>>> > 
>>>> > --
>>>> > Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.nabble.com/Groovy-Dev-f372993.html
>>> 
>> 

Mime
View raw message