hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [vote] Incorrect definition of lazy consensus in by-laws?
Date Thu, 21 Mar 2013 21:53:53 GMT
Swapping out "lazy consensus" for "consensus approval" seems to make sense.
But might it also be a good idea to specify how lazy consensus (as defined
in the ASF glossary, and as used throughout the foundation) can be used? I
presume Hadoop makes heavy use of lazy consensus. (This is a drive-by
posting on my behalf. I am otherwise not involved in your community.)
Examples would be a C-T-R policy, changes to the wiki, or any time someone
says "I plan to do X. If nobody objects in 72 hours, I will assume lazy
consensus."


On 21 March 2013 21:44, Aaron T. Myers <atm@cloudera.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Robert Evans <evans@yahoo-inc.com>
> wrote:
>
> > So to make this official I propose that we change the term "lazy
> > consensus" to "consensus approval" (aka s/lazy\s+consensus/consensus
> > approval/gi) in the bylaws so that it matches the terms used in the
> apache
> > foundation glossary.
> >
> > As per the by-laws this would take a "lazy majority" of active PMC
> members.
> >
> > Lazy Majority - A lazy majority vote requires 3 binding +1 votes and more
> > binding +1 votes than -1 votes.
> >
> >
> > Voting lasts 7 days, so it closes Thursday March 28th.
> >
>
> All sounds good to me, though I recommend you start a new [VOTE] thread so
> that folks realize that this thread has moved on from a discussion into an
> actual vote.
>
> --
> Aaron T. Myers
> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>



-- 
NS

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