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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 ;)
