As we noted in the last thread, this discussion should have been on private@ to begin with, but, the ship has sailed.
You are suggesting that non-PMC members vote on whether the PMC has to do something? No, that's not how anything works here. It's certainly the PMC that decides what to put in the board report, or take action on behalf of the project. This doesn't make sense here. Frankly, repeating this publicly without relevant context, and avoiding the response you already got, is inappropriate. You may call a PMC vote on whether there's even an issue here, sure. If you pursue it, you should explain specifically what the issue is w.r.t. policy, and argue against the response you've already received. We put valid issues in the board report, for sure. We do not include invalid issues in the board report. That part needs no decision from anyone. On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 3:08 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > No, this is a vote on dev@ intentionally as a part of our previous > thread, "ASF policy violation and Scala version issues" ( > https://lists.apache.org/thread/k7gr65wt0fwtldc7hp7bd0vkg1k93rrb) > > > did you mean this for the PMC list? > > I clearly started the thread with the following. > > - Apache Spark PMC should include this incident report and the result in > the next Apache Spark Quarterly Report (August). > > However, there is a perspective that this is none of Apache Spark PMC's > role here. > > That's the rationale of this vote. > > This vote is whether this is Apache Spark PMC's role or not. > > Dongjoon. >
