I've synced back all changes to confluence. Both represent the same
document as of now.
Please review and suggest if there are any outstanding concerns. Thanks for
all the feedback.
I wish to proceed with the implementation based on lazy consensus again.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 9:38 PM Mike Drob
Just to close the loop, I’m a little later than my promised last Friday for
fixing updating the missing 8.11 notes and the problem with the 8.10 Upgrade
notes page still showing DRAFT watermark, but I fixed both yesterday.
Thanks for the kind words in general - always very nice to hear. I fully
I should clarify, that my -1 was specifically about reaching lazy consensus
and not about that proposal itself.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 9:42 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > -1, I would like to see a proposal on list where it will be permanently
> available
>
> It w
> -1, I would like to see a proposal on list where it will be permanently
available
It will be available in the confluence document (as it currently is). The
google docs is just for collecting temporary feedback, thanks to easy
inline commenting capability. We promised to consolidate feedback in t
> -1, I would like to see a proposal on list where it will be permanently
available
> in the archives instead of being directed to a Google doc which can be
edited at any point in time.
> This has been an incredibly difficult proposal to keep track of.
This entire SIP process has been incredibly d
Okay, sure, I'll rescind my assertion about having reached a lazy
consensus. I'll work through all the recent comments and feedback.
I think at the last moment, there was an edit by Noble to the Google Doc
that hasn't made it into the SIP document, and I'll review that change, the
recent comments a
Also, I don't know that it's defined anywhere, but I feel that declaring
lazy consensus on a SIP in less than a week is rushing things. Some folks
won't have the flexibility to address things daily and I've been
uncomfortably pulled away from paid work trying to keep up with this as is.
Lazy consen
IMHO two things must happen before lazy consensus wait period can begin:
1) The wiki must be updated to reflect the results of discussion in the
google doc.
2) The fact that the wiki has been updated, and that you think the
discussion is at an end must be posted here, preferably with a summary
-1, I would like to see a proposal on list where it will be permanently
available in the archives instead of being directed to a Google doc which
can be edited at any point in time.
This has been an incredibly difficult proposal to keep track of.
Mike
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 6:09 AM Ishan Chatto
There is still discussion and disagreement in the Google doc.
The Google doc proposes that zk role structure is 1:1 for all roles -- except
the "data" role.
I assume the reason for that choice, even if not spelled out in the doc, is to
optimize for large clusters with 1000 nodes, and thus avoid
This proposal has passed with lazy consensus. We can proceed to the
implementation phase.
Thanks to everyone for feedback, esp. Gus for the patience.
On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 2:24 PM Gus Heck wrote:
> Thanks for adding that :) and Thanks to Nobel for translating my ravings
> :). Sorry about the a
11 matches
Mail list logo
