Thanks Richard +1 (binding)
Cheers Julien On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 at 09:59, Richard Zowalla <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello all, > > This is the 2nd attempt due to an oversight in the components to be > voted on. > > A few weeks ago we conducted a survey [1] and discussed the results > [2]. Corresponding details about the background can be found there. The > short version: We have too few resources to keep all modules up to > date. Old dependencies make it difficult to update the project. > > Now it's time for us to make an appropriate decision. For the sake of > simplicity, let's vote on the whole package. If there are differences > (ie. a VETO for this code change), we can still vote per module. > > Please keep in mind that corresponding modules can also exist outside > the main project (e.g. as a fork). A removed module can also be added > back at some point if it is updated and maintained appropriately. > > We are voting on the following proposal: > > Remove the following external components: > > - storm-cassandra > - storm-eventhubs > - storm-hbase > - storm-hive > - storm-kinesis > - storm-mongodb > - storm-mqtt > - storm-openmtsdb > - storm-pmml > - storm-pulsar > - storm-rocketmq > - storm-solr > > Keep the following components: > > - storm-autocreds (required by UI) > - storm-blobstore-migration > - storm-elasticsearch > - storm-jdbc > - storm-hdfs-* > - storm-jms > - storm-kafka-* > - storm-metrics > - storm-redis > > > "How to vote" on code modification is described here: > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification > > Only votes from the Storm PMC are binding, but everyone is welcome to > vote. The vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast. > > Please note: A -1 vote by a qualified voter (PMC) stops a code- > modification proposal in its tracks. This constitutes a veto, and it > cannot be overruled nor overridden by anyone. Vetoes stand until and > unless the individual withdraws their veto. To prevent vetoes from > being used capriciously, the voter must provide with the veto a > technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a security > exposure, negatively affects performance, etc. ). A veto without a > justification is invalid and has no weight. > > > Please VOTE on the removal of the modules mentioned above. The vote is > open for at least the next 72 hours or as long as needed. > > Please vote: > > [ ] +1 Remove the modules mentioned above > [ ] 0 No opinion > [ ] -1 Do NOT remove because {VETO REASON} > > Gruß > Richard > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/f0396c98ttt1688ys9jlxd3wx3ykvch4 > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/s7nsrq4byn7z1b4504l8hy7vlj7f0bpl > > -- *Open Source Solutions for Text Engineering* http://www.digitalpebble.com http://digitalpebble.blogspot.com/ #digitalpebble <http://twitter.com/digitalpebble>
