I agree with Jacques as well. I haven't vote yet but I also agree updating it before moving forward.
Tim On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote: > I think Jacques is probably right and Lazy Consensus is better. I have not > experienced a crisis where a commit is contentious, so it’s hypothetical for > me. Changing my vote: > > 0 (binding) > > Julian > > > On Oct 7, 2014, at 9:14 AM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I've given this some more thought and I think should fall back to Lazy >> Conesus on code commits. Given that the community is still young and we >> have okay but not great diversity, I think it would be best if we made sure >> that smaller contingents in the community are heard. I prefer to be >> conservative in making sure each voice is heard early in the development of >> Drill. If we find that the project becomes gridlocked by this, it would be >> reasonable to update the bylaws to use a lazy majority fallback instead. >> >> As such, I'm leaning towards a negative vote on the current bylaws. That >> said, I'd like to hear from others on how they feel about this. Thoughts >> people? >> >> Jacques >> >> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Steven Phillips <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Lazy Majority seems fine to me. Do we really want to allow a single >>> dissenting vote to hold up needed changes? >>> >>> It's possible at some point there me be a split in the community over the >>> direction that Drill should take, and requiring consensus could result in >>> the project coming to a stand still. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I just got back after vacation so haven't had a chance to get caught up >>> on >>>> email. >>>> >>>> What was the thinking of using Lazy approval > Lazy Majority versus using >>>> Lazy Approval > Lazy Consensus for code changes? >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Tomer Shiran <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In order for Drill to graduate to a TLP, we need to finalize the >>>> project's >>>>> bylaws. Here's the latest proposal that has been shared/discussed on >>> this >>>>> list: >>>>> >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DRILL/Proposed+Bylaws >>>>> >>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours. It will close on Oct 9, 4pm PT. >>>>> >>>>> [ ] +1 >>>>> [ ] +0 >>>>> [ ] -1 >>>>> >>>>> Please indicate whether your vote is binding or non-binding. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Tomer >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Steven Phillips >>> Software Engineer >>> >>> mapr.com >>> >
