+1 On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 1:27 AM Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote:
> Dear CouchDB developers, > > This vote decides whether the CouchDB project accepts the proposal[1] > to switch our underlying storage and distributed systems technology out > for FoundationDB[2]. > > At the outset, we said that we wanted to cover these topic areas before > making a vote: > > - Bylaw changes > - RFC process: done, passed > - Add qualified vote option: done, changes proposed were not > ratified > > - Roadmap: proposal done, detailed discussions TBD, includes > deprecations > > - Onboarding: ASF onboarding links shared, CouchDB specific onboarding > TBD. > > - (Re-)Branding: tentatively: 3.0 is the last release before FDB > CouchDB and 4.0 is the FDB CouchDB. If we need nicknames, we can > decide on those later. > > - FoundationDB Governance: FoundationDB is currently loosely organised > between Apple and a few key stakeholder companies invested in the > technology. Apple contributions are trending downwards relatively, > approaching 50%, which means in the future, more non-Apple than Apple > contributions are likely. > > In addition, the CouchDB PMC has requested addition to the current > organisational FDB weekly meeting, which is where any more formal > governance decisions are going to be made and the CouchDB PMC can be > a part of the surrounding discussions. > > - FoundationDB Operations knowledge: IBM has intends to share this > knowledge as they acquire it in conjunction with Apache CouchDB in > terms of general ops knowledge, best practices and tooling. > > - Proj. Mgmt.: RFC process + outline list of TBD RFCs allow for enough > visibility and collaboration opportunities, everyone on dev@ list is > encouraged to participate. > > - Tech deep dives: DISCUSS threads and RFCs are covering this, current > list of TBD DISCUSS/RFCs, for the proposal. Most of which were > already discussed on dev@ or RFC’d in our documentation repo: > > * JSON doc storage and storage of edit conflicts > * revision management > * _changes feed > * _db_updates > * _all_docs > * database creation and deletion > * attachments > * mango indexes (including collation) > * map-only views / search / geo > * reduces > * aggregate metrics (data_size, etc.) > * release engineering > * local/desktop/dev install security > > * * * > > As shown above, all topics we wanted to have clarity on have been > advanced to a point where we are now ready to make a decision: > > Should Apache CouchDB adopt FoundationDB? > > Since this is a big decision, I suggest we make this a Lazy 2/3 > Majority Vote with PMC Binding Votes, and a 7 day duration (as per our > bylaws[3]). > > You can cast your votes now. > > Best > Jan > — > [1]: > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04e7889354c077a6beb91fd1292b6d38b7a3f2c6a5dc7d20f5b87c44@%3Cdev.couchdb.apache.org%3E > [2]: https://www.foundationdb.org > [3]: https://couchdb.apache.org/bylaws.html > > >