incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: my pTLP view
Date Sun, 25 Jan 2015 20:07:49 GMT
I'm not arguing with you Greg (smile), honestly, Subversion sounds like a
very laid back place to participate. It's different in Bigtop, HBase,
Phoenix, Whirr (of historical note), and Hadoop (secondhand observation),
Hive (secondhand observation), ZooKeeper (secondhand observation) and
others. Formal votes are called on releases, committerships, PMC elevation,
branch merges (with even additional hurdles by bylaw), and are most
definitely talled.

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:

> Apache Subversion uses discussion/consensus for all of those. We throw out
> +1 and similar as shorthand for our preference, but we never tally, as it
> isn't a formal vote.
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > In all of the projects I have been PMC or PPMC on, we vote on releases,
> new
> > committers, and elevating committers to PMC.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > This is *exactly* the way things work in a TLP.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, everyone new to the Foundation on the PPMC has a sense of equal
> > > > ownership in the process. The PPMC makes a decision together as
> equals,
> > > > then the decision is reviewed as a whole. But this is not how things
> > > would
> > > > work in a pTLP, right? Individuals there would effectively cast votes
> > +1
> > > > (binding), or -1 (binding), +1 (non-binding), or -1 (non-binding),
> > etc.,
> > > > depending if they are a Member or not. Maybe in practice the pTLP PMC
> > > > wouldn't write down their votes like that, but somehow the
> distinction
> > > must
> > > > be presented in the tallies to be meaningful.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Nah. First: votes should be rare in the first place. Go for consensus
> > > instead. Apache Subversion has had maybe 3 votes in its 15 year
> history.
> > >
> > > And if you *do* end up voting? People already know who is binding or
> not.
> > > This isn't some star chamber PMC. Everybody knows each other already.
> If
> > > the PMC is voting differently from the others, then you have a problem,
> > > regardless of not/binding.
> > >
> > > Anyways... we'll run the experiment, and see how it works. We may have
> a
> > > candidate already.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > -g
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>



-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

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