It seems like if you are adding responsibilities you should do a vote.  SPIP'S 
require votes from PMC members so you are now putting more responsibility on 
them. It feels like we should have an official vote to make sure they (PMC 
members) agree with that and to make sure everyone pays attention to it.  That 
thread has been there for a while just as discussion and now all of a sudden 
its implemented without even an announcement being sent out about it. 
Tom 

    On Monday, March 13, 2017 11:37 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
 

 This ended up proceeding as a normal doc change, instead of precipitating a 
meta-vote.However, the text that's on the web site now can certainly be further 
amended if anyone wants to propose a change from here.
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 1:50 PM Tom Graves <tgraves...@yahoo.com> wrote:

I think a vote here would be good. I think most of the discussion was done by 4 
or 5 people and its a long thread.  If nothing else it summarizes everything 
and gets people attention to the change.
Tom 

    On Thursday, March 9, 2017 10:55 AM, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
 

 I think a VOTE is over-thinking it, and is rarely used, but, can't hurt. Nah, 
anyone can call a vote. This really isn't that formal. We just want to declare 
and document consensus.
I think SPIP is just a remix of existing process anyway, and don't think it 
will actually do much anyway, which is why I am sanguine about the whole thing.
To bring this to a conclusion, I will just put the contents of the doc in an 
email tomorrow for a VOTE. Raise any objections now.
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 3:39 PM Cody Koeninger <c...@koeninger.org> wrote:

I started this idea as a fork with a merge-able change to docs.
Reynold moved it to his google doc, and has suggested during this
email thread that a vote should occur.
If a vote needs to occur, I can't see anything on
http://apache.org/foundation/voting.html suggesting that I can call
for a vote, which is why I'm asking PMC members to do it since they're
the ones who would vote anyway.
Now Sean is saying this is a code/doc change that can just be reviewed
and merged as usual...which is what I tried to do to begin with.

The fact that you haven't agreed on a process to agree on your process
is, I think, an indication that the process really does need
improvement ;)




   


   

Reply via email to