You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@hadoop.apache.org by Tom White <to...@cloudera.com> on 2011/05/05 02:59:14 UTC
[DISCUSSION] Release rules
One year ago (to the day!) Chris started a discussion about the
release manager role
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ch2q1267dd3b1005041331r7d8f696di370a279ff605832f@mail.gmail.com%3E).
In light of today's disagreements, I think we should restart this
discussion and incorporate these rules into the bylaws, since it
formalizes our practices.
I'm happy to drive this. We could start by discussing Chris' proposal
(see clarifications in
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ct2y1267dd3b1005051201h7116e4caud75673ac9d5128d6@mail.gmail.com%3E),
then when we get consensus we can put the document on the website.
(BTW does anyone know if the bylaws were checked into SVN anywhere?
These belong together.)
Cheers,
Tom
Re: [DISCUSSION] Release rules
Posted by "Tsz Wo (Nicholas), Sze" <s2...@yahoo.com>.
Withdraw my -1.
Eli, thanks for pointing it out about the vote.
Nicholas
________________________________
From: Eli Collins <el...@cloudera.com>
To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Sent: Thu, May 5, 2011 11:10:13 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Release rules
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Tsz Wo (Nicholas), Sze
<s2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I don't think the bylaws were checked in, we should do that first. How
>> about checking them into the site repo so they get generated as part
>> of the docs?
>
> -1
>
> Please don't check in anything before having a vote. Thanks.
>
The project already has bylaws. Owen proposed them and they passed,
we should check them into svn.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201011.mbox/%3CAANLkTikWUHBedykosKNqPweuOvu2qCKfcf_+HwwivsQa@mail.gmail.com%3E
Thanks,
Eli
Re: [DISCUSSION] Release rules
Posted by Eli Collins <el...@cloudera.com>.
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Tsz Wo (Nicholas), Sze
<s2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I don't think the bylaws were checked in, we should do that first. How
>> about checking them into the site repo so they get generated as part
>> of the docs?
>
> -1
>
> Please don't check in anything before having a vote. Thanks.
>
The project already has bylaws. Owen proposed them and they passed,
we should check them into svn.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201011.mbox/%3CAANLkTikWUHBedykosKNqPweuOvu2qCKfcf_+HwwivsQa@mail.gmail.com%3E
Thanks,
Eli
Re: [DISCUSSION] Release rules
Posted by "Tsz Wo (Nicholas), Sze" <s2...@yahoo.com>.
> I don't think the bylaws were checked in, we should do that first. How
> about checking them into the site repo so they get generated as part
> of the docs?
-1
Please don't check in anything before having a vote. Thanks.
Nicholas
________________________________
From: Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>
To: general@hadoop.apache.org
Sent: Thu, May 5, 2011 9:36:25 AM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Release rules
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 23:40, Eli Collins <el...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Tom White <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> One year ago (to the day!) Chris started a discussion about the
>> release manager role
>>(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ch2q1267dd3b1005041331r7d8f696di370a279ff605832f@mail.gmail.com%3E).
>>.
>> In light of today's disagreements, I think we should restart this
>> discussion and incorporate these rules into the bylaws, since it
>> formalizes our practices.
>>
>> I'm happy to drive this. We could start by discussing Chris' proposal
>> (see clarifications in
>>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ct2y1267dd3b1005051201h7116e4caud75673ac9d5128d6@mail.gmail.com%3E),
>>,
>> then when we get consensus we can put the document on the website.
>> (BTW does anyone know if the bylaws were checked into SVN anywhere?
>> These belong together.)
>
> Sounds good to me. I like Chris' proposal, he was clear that "nothing
> should be in (unreleased) 0.x that isn't also in trunk." so that may
> needs to be revisited if we want to be consistent with today's vote.
>
> I don't think the bylaws were checked in, we should do that first. How
> about checking them into the site repo so they get generated as part
> of the docs? Eg this is how Pig does it:
> http://pig.apache.org/bylaws.html
+1 makes sense.
>
> Thanks,
> Eli
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Release rules
Posted by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 23:40, Eli Collins <el...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Tom White <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> One year ago (to the day!) Chris started a discussion about the
>> release manager role
>> (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ch2q1267dd3b1005041331r7d8f696di370a279ff605832f@mail.gmail.com%3E).
>> In light of today's disagreements, I think we should restart this
>> discussion and incorporate these rules into the bylaws, since it
>> formalizes our practices.
>>
>> I'm happy to drive this. We could start by discussing Chris' proposal
>> (see clarifications in
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ct2y1267dd3b1005051201h7116e4caud75673ac9d5128d6@mail.gmail.com%3E),
>> then when we get consensus we can put the document on the website.
>> (BTW does anyone know if the bylaws were checked into SVN anywhere?
>> These belong together.)
>
> Sounds good to me. I like Chris' proposal, he was clear that "nothing
> should be in (unreleased) 0.x that isn't also in trunk." so that may
> needs to be revisited if we want to be consistent with today's vote.
>
> I don't think the bylaws were checked in, we should do that first. How
> about checking them into the site repo so they get generated as part
> of the docs? Eg this is how Pig does it:
> http://pig.apache.org/bylaws.html
+1 makes sense.
>
> Thanks,
> Eli
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Release rules
Posted by Eli Collins <el...@cloudera.com>.
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Tom White <to...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> One year ago (to the day!) Chris started a discussion about the
> release manager role
> (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ch2q1267dd3b1005041331r7d8f696di370a279ff605832f@mail.gmail.com%3E).
> In light of today's disagreements, I think we should restart this
> discussion and incorporate these rules into the bylaws, since it
> formalizes our practices.
>
> I'm happy to drive this. We could start by discussing Chris' proposal
> (see clarifications in
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201005.mbox/%3Ct2y1267dd3b1005051201h7116e4caud75673ac9d5128d6@mail.gmail.com%3E),
> then when we get consensus we can put the document on the website.
> (BTW does anyone know if the bylaws were checked into SVN anywhere?
> These belong together.)
Sounds good to me. I like Chris' proposal, he was clear that "nothing
should be in (unreleased) 0.x that isn't also in trunk." so that may
needs to be revisited if we want to be consistent with today's vote.
I don't think the bylaws were checked in, we should do that first. How
about checking them into the site repo so they get generated as part
of the docs? Eg this is how Pig does it:
http://pig.apache.org/bylaws.html
Thanks,
Eli