Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
To: "general@lucene.apache.org" <general@lucene.apache.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:04:49 -0800
Subject: Re: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
Thread-Topic: [VOTE] merge lucene/solr development (take 3)
Thread-Index: AcrB2egyVtIXjebfRA6vh1xBKvKTKwAI9Wuz
Message-ID: <C7BFA621.E1D4%Chris.A.Mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
In-Reply-To: <88f6e29a1003120347v76309905w23761ec10161b07d@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

Hi Bernd,

> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 04:29, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>> Hi Yonik,
>>=20
>> IMO, this vote has not passed. A bullet of this proposal proposes code
>> modifications and this is subject to VETO per Apache guidelines:
>>=20
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#Veto
>=20
> Vetos only relate to some specific svn commit.
> You cannot veto proposals, releases, strategic decisions and anything els=
e.
>=20
> (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.=20

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 abou=
t
that, and plan to.

>=20
>>=20
>> Since that point is up for debate, I think we can get clarification on t=
his
>> from the board at their next meeting, but I dispute calling the VOTE
>> "passed" until that time.
>=20
> 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


>=20
>   Bernd
>=20
>> In the meanwhile there has been much community discussion and points mad=
e 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 conci=
se
>> goals, and incremental pieces to vote on.
>>=20
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>=20
>> On 3/11/10 6:29 PM, "Yonik Seeley" <yonik@apache.org> wrote:
>>=20
>>> Thanks everyone, this vote has passed.
>>> A bit more contentious of a PMC vote than usual, but the committer
>>> vote was clear.
>>>=20
>>> -Yonik
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> 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.
>>>>=20
>>>> Please vote for the proposal quoted below to merge lucene/solr develop=
ment.
>>>> Here's my +1
>>>>=20
>>>> -Yonik
>>>>=20
>>>> Mike's call for a VOTE (amongst lucene/solr committers +11 to -1):
>>>> http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/a400ffe62ae21aca/vo=
te_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 onl=
y
>>>>> that Lucene can cut a release even if Solr doesn't):
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Merging the dev lists into a single list.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Merging committers.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* When any change is committed (to a module that "belongs to" Solr=
 or
>>>>> =A0 =A0to Lucene), all tests must pass.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Release details will be decided by dev community, but, Lucene ma=
y
>>>>> =A0 =A0release without Solr.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Modulariize the sources: pull things out of Lucene's core (break
>>>>> =A0 =A0out query parser, move all core queries & analyzers under thei=
r
>>>>> =A0 =A0contrib counterparts), pull things out of Solr's core (analyze=
rs,
>>>>> =A0 =A0queries).
>>>>>=20
>>>>> These things would not change:
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Besides modularizing (above), the source code would remain facto=
red
>>>>> =A0 =A0into separate dirs/modules the way it is now.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Issue tracking remains separate (SOLR-XXX and LUCENE-XXX
>>>>> =A0 =A0issues).
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* User's lists remain separate.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Web sites remain separate.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =A0* Release artifacts/jars remain separate.
>>>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 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: =A0 http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>=20


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++