On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 08:49:55PM -0700, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:49:51PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> >> +Once the vote has been called the proposal should be considered fixed.
> >> + No further changes
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:49:51PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> +Once the vote has been called the proposal should be considered fixed.
>> + No further changes are accepted.
>
> Can I suggest that you make explicit the option to can
Done - but please note this is the last edit I am doing on this topic.
I do not agree with the necessaity for this rule. If the IPMC wants to
make further clarifications then go for it. I have more improtant
things to do.
Index: content/incubation/Process_Description.html
=
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:49:51PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> +Once the vote has been called the proposal should be considered fixed.
> + No further changes are accepted.
Can I suggest that you make explicit the option to cancel the vote, amend the
proposal, and re-start the vote? This
Thanks Marvin.
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
On 19 Jun 2013 06:19, "Marvin Humphrey" wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
> > I trust someone who believes this is a fixed rule rather than a
> > social-norm by which we are guided will no
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> He said majority, not everybody ant. Try a little harder to
> understand the written words instead of needing to interject
> your dissonant 2 cents and things will improve around here.
>
>
Don't be so abrasive Joe, I'm a mentor for this podli
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> I trust someone who believes this is a fixed rule rather than a
> social-norm by which we are guided will now go and document it
> appropriately in [2] (see ISSUE 09 [1]).
Your change to the "process description" page seems fine to me.
I als
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> In the interest of being a bit pedantic, I think that most people are OK
> with some changes to votes in progress. In particular, extending the
> declared time for a vote is generally acceptable to most of the communities
> I have seen it in.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> It seems clear that the majority of IPMC members believe this change
> on a vote in progress is not acceptable.
>
In the interest of being a bit pedantic, I think that most people are OK
with some changes to votes in progress. In particular
ject: Re: Stratos proposal: is it possible to add another initial
> committer?
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
>
>> It seems clear that the majority of IPMC members believe this change
>> on a vote in progress is not acceptable.
>>
The Apache way is *"community over code"*, as a healthy community we
should encourage community growth. IMO I do not consider adding a new
member to the initial committer list as a big change to the proposal.
In fact, now I believe if we had a separate VOTE for him, we will not
have this much tra
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> It seems clear that the majority of IPMC members believe this change
> on a vote in progress is not acceptable.
>
>
Don't assume its that clear, i think at least some agree with you that this
is just ISSUE3 and kept quiet, thats what i did.
It seems clear that the majority of IPMC members believe this change
on a vote in progress is not acceptable.
I note that this change is different to the trademark promise made
earlier since that one had been agreed in the discuss thread. That
change was merely bringing the proposal into line with
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 01:34:39PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> However, in this specific case the social norm *should* be to allow the
> change to proceed - that's the most efficient process.
Modifying a vote that has started is a slippery slope. (The same is true for
reusing version numbers: AN
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013, at 05:45 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
> > For me the social norm *should* be to allow things to progress
> > unhindered unless an action is non-reversible and potentially damaging
> > to the community.
>
> No. That's
- Original Message -
> From: Marvin Humphrey
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Stratos proposal: is it possible to add another initial
> committer?
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Ross Gard
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> For me the social norm *should* be to allow things to progress
> unhindered unless an action is non-reversible and potentially damaging
> to the community.
No. That's not acceptable to me as an IPMC member.
VOTEs are tied to specific langua
On 18 June 2013 13:04, Tim Williams wrote:
> Another option is to discount votes prior to the last mutation. Or,
> we add a wiki page that explains to new folks how the social norms can
> be overridden/bullied occasionally by headstrong, salty old-timers as
> they see fit...
Nice observation (an
C'mon Tim this was not done as a "social norms can be overridden/bullied
occasionally by headstrong, salty old-timers" thing at all. It was
something that seemed small and simple and innocent.
However if its such a major thing then the PPMC can vote Debo in as soon as
it starts. No biggie. Honest.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> I respectfully suggest your intervention is an example of ISSUE 03 (too
> many cooks). As a champion I'm interested in podlings learning the Apache
> Way - a significant part of this is to not let unnecessary process get in
> the way of softwa
I respectfully suggest your intervention is an example of ISSUE 03 (too
many cooks). As a champion I'm interested in podlings learning the Apache
Way - a significant part of this is to not let unnecessary process get in
the way of software development.
The vote is still open and can be stopped wit
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> C'mon Marvin. The project has enough ASF committers on the initial
> commiter list (ignoring mentors) to be able to conduct a committer
> vote.
>
> Lets not add unnecessary bureaucracy during the initial set-up phase.
Voting in a new committ
Thanks a lot Sanjiva, Ross, Afkham!
debo
From: Afkham Azeez mailto:afk...@gmail.com>>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:05:14 +0530
To: mailto:general@incubator.apache.org>>
Cc: Debo~ Dutta mailto:dedu...@cisco.com>>
Subject: Re: Stratos proposal: is it possible to add another initial
I'm also not worried about figuring out how to do stuff .. :-).
Sanjiva.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> C'mon Marvin. The project has enough ASF committers on the initial
> commiter list (ignoring mentors) to be able to conduct a committer
> vote.
>
> Lets not add unnec
Added Debo to the initial committer list.
Azeez
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> I have not closed the vote yet because it ran over the weekend. I did
> state I would leave it running into this week.
>
> As champion I have no objection to you adding Debo. Ultimately it
> r
C'mon Marvin. The project has enough ASF committers on the initial
commiter list (ignoring mentors) to be able to conduct a committer
vote.
Lets not add unnecessary bureaucracy during the initial set-up phase.
Ross
On 17 June 2013 19:01, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:37 AM
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> Debo Dutta, cc'ed, from Cisco, will be joining the project and it took a
> bit of time to get it sorted.
>
> I realize this is a late request as the VOTE is already running .. is it ok
> to add him now? ;-)
>
> If not we will bring him
I have not closed the vote yet because it ran over the weekend. I did
state I would leave it running into this week.
As champion I have no objection to you adding Debo. Ultimately it
reduces unnecessary traffic on this list since we won't have to
formally vote him in.
Ross
On 17 June 2013 18:37,
Debo Dutta, cc'ed, from Cisco, will be joining the project and it took a
bit of time to get it sorted.
I realize this is a late request as the VOTE is already running .. is it ok
to add him now? ;-)
If not we will bring him after the project starts.
Cheers,
Sanjiva.
--
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.
29 matches
Mail list logo
