hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Clarify bylaws on PMC chair voting
Date Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:25:50 GMT
The current bylaws state that the PMC chair recommendation to the apache
board should be based off of lazy consensus.  That means that any PMC
member can -1(veto) a candidate so long as they give a valid reason with
the veto. The validity of the reason for the veto if challenged can be
confirmed by another PMC member.  I am fine with the proposal to use STV.
However, I don't think in practice it really matters if we allow for
vetoes or not.  If someone really feels strongly enough to veto a
candidate, they would also feel strongly enough make their reason known
during the voting and discussion on the candidate. If the reason is valid
enough to withstand a challenge I would suspect it would also be valid
enough to influence any voting process we set up.  I don't care what
voting process we use, I just care that the bylaws are clarified to pick
one that can handle one or more candidates.

-- Bobby

On 11/12/12 5:53 PM, "Owen O'Malley" <omalley@apache.org> wrote:

>Thanks, Nicholas.
>
>I think the vote for PMC chair should be a straight majority vote with STV
>used in the case of more than 2 choices. Using +1 and/or -1's when voting
>in a multiple choice seems confused and likely to cause more problems than
>it solves.
>
>-- Owen


Mime
View raw message