lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
Date Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:04:49 GMT
Hi Bernd,

> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 04:29, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>> Hi Yonik,
>> 
>> IMO, this vote has not passed. A bullet of this proposal proposes code
>> modifications and this is subject to VETO per Apache guidelines:
>> 
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto
> 
> Vetos only relate to some specific svn commit.
> You cannot veto proposals, releases, strategic decisions and anything else.
> 
> (This is intended to be a generic comment, I'm not commenting on the
> vote(s) in this thread itself.)

Actually code modifications are those performed or proposed. At least that's
my interpretation, but I'm not an ASF lawyer :) Let's ask the board though
-- they can help. 

Regardless, even if that point is moot, the sheer amount of emails,
discussion, amendments, etc., to these 3 sets of proposals and their
evolution is enough for me to also believe that this was too nebulous of a
vote to even know what you're voting on. So, I'd like to ask the board about
that, and plan to.

> 
>> 
>> Since that point is up for debate, I think we can get clarification on this
>> from the board at their next meeting, but I dispute calling the VOTE
>> "passed" until that time.
> 
> At this point, I don't think the board can really help resolving this
> issue any better than this community can.

Well that's your perspective. I have a different one.

Cheers,
Chris


> 
>   Bernd
> 
>> In the meanwhile there has been much community discussion and points made in
>> favor of each point of view over the past week. My recommendation is to sit
>> on this for at least a week, then revisit the issue with clear and concise
>> goals, and incremental pieces to vote on.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>> 
>> On 3/11/10 6:29 PM, "Yonik Seeley" <yonik@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks everyone, this vote has passed.
>>> A bit more contentious of a PMC vote than usual, but the committer
>>> vote was clear.
>>> 
>>> -Yonik
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Yonik Seeley <yseeley@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Apoligies in advance for calling yet another vote, but I just wanted
>>>> to make sure this was official.
>>>> Mike's second VOTE thread could probably technically stand on it's own
>>>> (since it included PMC votes), but given that I said in my previous
>>>> VOTE thread that I was just polling Lucene/Solr committers and would
>>>> call a second PMC vote, that may have acted to suppress PMC votes on
>>>> Mike's thread also.
>>>> 
>>>> Please vote for the proposal quoted below to merge lucene/solr development.
>>>> Here's my +1
>>>> 
>>>> -Yonik
>>>> 
>>>> Mike's call for a VOTE (amongst lucene/solr committers +11 to -1):
>>>> http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/a400ffe62ae21aca/vote_me
>>>> rg
>>>> e_the_development_of_solr_lucene_take_2#22d7cd086d9c5cf0
>>>>> Subject: Merge the development of Solr/Lucene (take 2)
>>>>> A new vote, that slightly changes proposal from last vote (adding only
>>>>> that Lucene can cut a release even if Solr doesn't):
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Merging the dev lists into a single list.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Merging committers.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * When any change is committed (to a module that "belongs to" Solr
or
>>>>>    to Lucene), all tests must pass.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Release details will be decided by dev community, but, Lucene may
>>>>>    release without Solr.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Modulariize the sources: pull things out of Lucene's core (break
>>>>>    out query parser, move all core queries & analyzers under their
>>>>>    contrib counterparts), pull things out of Solr's core (analyzers,
>>>>>    queries).
>>>>> 
>>>>> These things would not change:
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Besides modularizing (above), the source code would remain factored
>>>>>    into separate dirs/modules the way it is now.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Issue tracking remains separate (SOLR-XXX and LUCENE-XXX
>>>>>    issues).
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * User's lists remain separate.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Web sites remain separate.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  * Release artifacts/jars remain separate.
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Senior Computer Scientist
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>> Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
>> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: Chris.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Mime
View raw message