I think the problem is that we're actually dealing with two flavors of lazy
consensus, one where you explicitly state "if no one disagrees by X then
I'm doing Y," and another where you do Y, and assume it is approved if no
one objects. For the former, you need some kind of minimum length to
announce. But for the latter, which is what happens under CTR, a length
doesn't make sense. ASF documentation is not entirely clear on this
distinction (the examples of lazy consensus are all of the first type, but
it also says that CTR is an application of decision making through lazy
consensus). That's why I think a good description of CTR would resolve the
issue.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:40 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
> The only two places we have a lazy falling back to another type of vote is
> code change and release plan. For release plan, I interpret the minimum
> length to apply to either type of vote. However, you're stating that this
> is not the case for a code change. So there is ambiguity about minimum
> length applying to lazy approvals that needs to be cleared up here.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Billie Rinaldi
> <billie.rina...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The only time there is more than one type of approval (not vote) required
>> is when the first one is lazy consensus, which doesn't actually require a
>> vote. Maybe we just need some elaboration on how to CTR which is
>> referenced from this doc ("Please refer to the Accumulo commit and review
>> standard for details")?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:17 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> If that is the case, then I think we should provide distinction about
>>> the time lengths between the various types of votes, for the cases where
>>> there are multiple possible votes involved.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Billie Rinaldi <billie.rina...@gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:46 PM, John Vines <vi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The way I'm reading actions, all code changes must be presented at
>>>>> least
>>>>> one day before they can be committed. Is that intended this way?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wasn't reading it that way. Code change is lazy approval, and "An
>>>> action with lazy approval is implicitly allowed unless a -1 vote is
>>>> received." Not requiring a vote supersedes the minimum vote length. In
>>>> the event of falling back to consensus approval for code change, the
>>>> minimum vote length is 1 day.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Billie Rinaldi <bil...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Hey everyone! We only have 3 more days to vote on Accumulo's bylaws
>>>>> ...
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Bill Havanki <
>>>>> bhava...@clouderagovt.com
>>>>> > >wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > Please vote on the proposed bylaws, as available at
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > *
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/accumulo/site/trunk/content/bylaws.mdtext?revision=1582476&view=markup
>>>>> > > <
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/accumulo/site/trunk/content/bylaws.mdtext?revision=1582476&view=markup
>>>>> > > >*
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > A nicer-to-read version is available at
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > http://accumulo.apache.org/bylaws.html
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > This vote will be open for 7 days, until 4 April 2014 14:00 UTC.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Upon successful completion of this vote, the first line of the
>>>>> document
>>>>> > > body
>>>>> > > will be replaced with "This is version 1 of the bylaws," and the
>>>>> > statement
>>>>> > > defining the document as a draft will be stricken. Additionally, a
>>>>> link
>>>>> > to
>>>>> > > the document will be added to the navigation menu.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > This vote requires majority approval to pass: at least 3 +1 votes
>>>>> and
>>>>> > more
>>>>> > > +1
>>>>> > > than -1's.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > [ ] +1 - "I approve of these proposed bylaws and accept them for
>>>>> the
>>>>> > > Apache Accumulo
>>>>> > > project."
>>>>> > > [ ] +0 - "I neither approve nor disapprove of these proposed
>>>>> bylaws, but
>>>>> > > accept them for the Apache Accumulo project."
>>>>> > > [ ] -1 - "I do not approve of these proposed bylaws and do not
>>>>> accept
>>>>> > them
>>>>> > > for
>>>>> > > the Apache Accumulo project because..."
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Thank you.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > --
>>>>> > > // Bill Havanki
>>>>> > > // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
>>>>> > > // 443.686.9283
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
