hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <cutt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Proposed bylaws for the Hadoop project
Date Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:29:20 GMT
Chris Douglas wrote:
> * Does a vetoed proposal require a new vote, or does a vote pass when
> all vetos are recanted?

It passes when all vetoes are recanted, in my experience.  I don't see 
advantages to restarting the vote.

> Can new objections/vetos be raised during that
> debate?

I think that as long as a veto is outstanding and discussion continues, 
the vote should be open and folks can change their votes.  Once both a 
week has passed since voting was started and there are no outstanding 
vetos, the vote passes.  A vote can be cancelled at any time.  If there 
are outstanding vetoes, and a week has passed since the vote was called, 
and discussion has stalled, then the vote should be declared as failed.

Should we be more precise about what constitutes ongoing discussion? 
Should we say, e.g., that, if there are no messages on the voting thread 
for a week and the vote has not passed, then the vote implicitly fails, 
and voting must be restarted if this issue is to be pursued further?

> * With consensus and 2/3 majorities, a 6 month emeritus period seems
> reasonable to me. However, the actions requiring them in the current
> document are rare (I hope), so arguing over these details may not be
> worthwhile. Surely we wouldn't move someone into that category without
> first asking them if they plan to become more active in the near term.
> It's important that this not be used to push people out, particularly
> since the 2/3 and consensus votes may be swayed by "noticing" inactive
> members.

+1 I'm okay with 6 months in the bylaws.  12 months seems to be what we 
do in practice, and we can continue to do that even if our rules say 6 
months.

Doug

Mime
View raw message