hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nigel Daley <nda...@mac.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Proposed bylaws for Hadoop
Date Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:14:48 GMT

On Oct 20, 2010, at 9:54 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote:

> 
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> 
>> With the exception of these two bullets, these bylaws seem equivalent to those posted
by several other projects.  Most projects use consensus-but-one for committer and PMC removal.
 Was this change intentional or accidental?
> 
> It was intentional. In my survey of other Apache project's bylaws, I was originally surprised
to find some such as HTTP Components (http://hc.apache.org/bylaws.html) that use majority
votes for removing people. However, the question is whether a small minority should be able
to drain a project's attention and energy.
> 
> For anyone who hasn't already seen it, there is an outstanding presentation on "Open
Source Projects and Poisonous People" that was done by Brian Fitzpatrick and Ben Collins-Sussman.
I'd highly recommend it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE. The presentation's central
thesis is that a project's attention and energy are its most valuable resource. People that
cause long emotional debates without contributing to the project are extremely destructive
to the project and must occasionally be asked to leave.
> 
> Of course everyone hopes to avoid these cases, but the question is whether the project
should have the mechanism to fix itself. I feel that it must.

FWIW, "PMC does not generally operate by majority but by consensus." was given as a rationale
when explaining to an existing PMC member why it was ok to approve so many new PMC members
from a single company.

Nige

Mime
View raw message