Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Various comments inline: On 15/09/2015 03:41, "Marko Rodriguez" wrote: >Hi, > >> Thanks for making a clear statement because it lets me focus on the >> question that may be central to this discussion: can you tell us why >> did you guys decided to join ASF in the first

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hi, > Implying that other people are not busy is not helpful and is simply > insulting other volunteers time. You are fortunate enough to get paid by > your employer to work pretty much full time on Tinkerpop judging by your > activity on the project. Most people here (including myself) have

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: > ...the project committee is left "hoping" that someone will care --- pinging > around > to their mentors (no reply)... This is your actual problem - a podling needs active mentors to operate. -Bertrand

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

That was a tour de force, Rob. Very well said. I'm glad that contributors from other podlings seem to be reading along. On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:17 AM, Rob Vesse wrote: > On 15/09/2015 03:41, "Marko Rodriguez" wrote: >>I did my part for TinkerPop

RE: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

General <general@incubator.apache.org> Subject: Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue? On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Marko Rodriguez <okramma...@gmail.com> wrote: > ...the project committee is left "hoping" that someone will care --- > pin

RE: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

-Original Message- From: Marko Rodriguez [mailto:okramma...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 7:41 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue? Hi, > Thanks for making a clear statement because it lets me fo

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Marko, Isn't the real problem a project level problem? Some projects are simply higher profile than others? As such, wouldn't be better to raise the profile of the projects not getting the votes rather than impair the ability to vote on popular projects? Votes on project admission haven't

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Am I the only one who sees an issue of moral hazard in this proposal? On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 12:28PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: > HI, > > Here is an idea: > > Can we offer $20 to the first 3 binding voters of a release on general@? We > would structure the contract as such: > > "The first

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hi Marko, On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: >> I think that Marvin's question to you was pretty cogent. Would you be >> willing to spend an hour or so each on 5 different projects you aren't >> involved in before getting to put your own project up for

RE: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue? Hello, > The Apache motto is "community over code". This means that Apache is > all about building community and trusting that the community will > build the code. If you don't have the community, then the code doe

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Building a community is all about enticing humans to participate. The magical marketing that you refer to is simply an example of giving in order to get. The Apache motto is "community over code". This means that Apache is all about building community and trusting that the community will build

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hello, > The Apache motto is "community over code". This means that Apache is all > about building community and trusting that the community will build the > code. If you don't have the community, then the code doesn't much matter. We have a community of users and vendors that leverage our

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: > Hi, > >> Thanks for making a clear statement because it lets me focus on the >> question that may be central to this discussion: can you tell us why >> did you guys decided to join ASF in the first place? This is not

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hi, > Thanks for making a clear statement because it lets me focus on the > question that may be central to this discussion: can you tell us why > did you guys decided to join ASF in the first place? This is not a baited > question: I'm genuinely curious about what kind of expectations did > you

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > Hi Marko, > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: >>> I think that Marvin's question to you was pretty cogent. Would you be >>> willing to spend an hour or so each on 5

RE: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

No, you're not the only one. Though my sense is the proposal was intended to stimulate discussion. -Original Message- From: Konstantin Boudnik [mailto:c...@apache.org] Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 3:28 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

I know one thing that always grabs my attention is when the community behind it votes on the topic, regardless of having binding/non-binding votes to back it. It shows me that there is a lot of interest in it, and will remind me to look at it closely and throw my vote in. Another way to compare

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hello, I suppose my concern is exactly what the two replies thus far espouse -- "human whim." This means that a "song and dance" must be done to "entice" the human to entertain a VOTE. I suspect The Apache Software Foundation would argue that paying people to VOTE (regardless if they +1 or

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

HI, Here is an idea: Can we offer $20 to the first 3 binding voters of a release on general@? We would structure the contract as such: "The first 3 binding voters on Apache TinkerPop x.y.z get $20 regardless of their vote being a -1 or +1. However, the binding voter must give an

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hi Marko, Have you ever considered reviewing other podlings' incubating release candidates and cast non-binding votes yourself? If podling contributors like you would all help each other by performing thorough inspections of each others release candidates (and by learning enough to perform those

RE: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

The number of votes is unimportant. Anyone not voting is implicitly voting +1 (or maybe +0). The minimum count of 3 is just to ensure there were enough eyes on formal decisions. If a podling is struggling to get the require 3 +1s then that is a problem for them mentors to help address. If you

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

On 14/09/15 17:26, Marko Rodriguez wrote: Hello, It appears that VOTEing in general@ is inefficient and biased. An Apache member will see a VOTE on the list and can choose whether to participate in that VOTE or not. I believe there are problems with this algorithm. The first has to do with

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hi, > Thought 1: Who is "we" in this scenario? That is, whose budget do you imagine > the $60 coming out of? Me personally. > Thought 2: No, there's no chance that this kind of expenditure would be > permissible under our non-profit status. Of course. I'm mainly speaking as a devil's

Re: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

On 09/14/2015 02:28 PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: HI, Here is an idea: Can we offer $20 to the first 3 binding voters of a release on general@? We would structure the contract as such: "The first 3 binding voters on Apache TinkerPop x.y.z get $20 regardless of their vote being a -1