You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com> on 2013/07/24 19:02:25 UTC
Re: [VOTE] Update by-laws to add section for non-technical decision
making (Was: Re: [RESULTS][SUMMARY][DISCUSS][VOTE] List CloudStack related
books on the website)
Noah,
Did you ever review / report / re-vote this?
Thanks,
Matt
On 6/25/13 11:17 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>Thanks for the feedback, Matt.
>
>Anyone else got any feedback on this? Might cut a new vote.
>
>
>On 24 June 2013 05:12, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Noah,
>>
>> I agree that there needs to be a delineation. Here's my option on
>>wording
>> describing what is non-technical:
>>
>> +3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions
>>
>> +Non-technical decisions should normally be made by the entire community
>> using
>> +discussion-lead consensus-building, and not through formal voting.
>> +
>> +Non-technical decisions are defined as a decision that do not directly
>> affect
>> +the code in any branch of the project.
>> +Including coding, testing, documentation or management of the code
>>base.
>> +
>> +Non-technical decisions can be made on whichever project mailing list
>>is
>> most
>> +appropriate.
>> +
>> +Non-technical decisions cannot be vetoed, but if there is strong
>> opposition
>> +a formal vote can be used to resolve the dispute.
>> +
>> +If a formal vote is started for a non-technical decision, the vote
>>will be
>> held
>> +as a lazy 2/3 majority of active committers.
>> +
>> +Any user, contributor, committer or PMC member can initiate a
>> non-technical
>> +decision making process.
>>
>>
>>
>> Matt Mullins
>> Cloud Platforms Implementation Engineer
>> Worldwide Cloud Services Citrix System, Inc.
>> +1 (407) 920-1107 Office/Cell Phone
>> matt.mullins@citrix.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/20/13 11:59 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> >Less terse follow up... ;)
>> >
>> >Note that our current by-laws effectively state that any technical
>> >decision
>> >needs to happen on dev@. I am just clarifying the intent.
>> >
>> >Note also that we currently do not define what a "technical decision"
>>is,
>> >but it is my opinion that this is any decision which relates to the
>> >CloudStack source code. (We might want to make it a little broader than
>> >that. Open to suggestions.)
>> >
>> >Almost everything we do involves technology. Whether that is editing
>>the
>> >website, wiki, JIRA, mailing lists, etc. That doesn't mean that those
>> >activities are "technical activities" or involve "technical decisions".
>> >
>> >Do you think our by-laws need a section clarifying technical vs.
>> >non-technical? What should it say?
>> >
>> >
>> >On 20 June 2013 15:14, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 08:21 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> >> > Devs,
>> >> >
>> >> > I would like to call a vote on the following modification to our
>> >>by-laws.
>> >> > This is in response to the
>> >> >
>> >> > Summary of changes:
>> >> >
>> >> > * Addition of "3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions" section. This
>>specifies
>> >> > that
>> >> > non-technical decisions can be made on any appropriate list (i.e.
>> >> > marketing@)
>> >>
>> >> Erm. Does this mean that marketing can't make any technical decisions
>> >> about the Web site, for instance?
>> >>
>> >> I think this needs to be better worded.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> jzb
>> >> --
>> >> Joe Brockmeier
>> >> jzb@zonker.net
>> >> Twitter: @jzb
>> >> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >NS
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>NS
Re: [VOTE] Update by-laws to add section for non-technical decision
making (Was: Re: [RESULTS][SUMMARY][DISCUSS][VOTE] List CloudStack related
books on the website)
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Everyone is free to propose changes to the by-laws. If you want to make a
patch and call a vote on it, by all means, go ahead. :) That sot of stuff
is a good way to become a committer in the first place. ;)
On 24 July 2013 18:34, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com> wrote:
> I'm not a committer so I don't want really to take this one on the Bylaws
> side. :-)
>
> Matt
>
>
> On 7/24/13 1:19 PM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >Nope. Sorry. Feel free to run with it. If not, I can see about doing
> >another vote in the next few days.
> >
> >
> >On 24 July 2013 18:02, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Noah,
> >>
> >> Did you ever review / report / re-vote this?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Matt
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/25/13 11:17 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Thanks for the feedback, Matt.
> >> >
> >> >Anyone else got any feedback on this? Might cut a new vote.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On 24 June 2013 05:12, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Noah,
> >> >>
> >> >> I agree that there needs to be a delineation. Here's my option on
> >> >>wording
> >> >> describing what is non-technical:
> >> >>
> >> >> +3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions
> >> >>
> >> >> +Non-technical decisions should normally be made by the entire
> >>community
> >> >> using
> >> >> +discussion-lead consensus-building, and not through formal voting.
> >> >> +
> >> >> +Non-technical decisions are defined as a decision that do not
> >>directly
> >> >> affect
> >> >> +the code in any branch of the project.
> >> >> +Including coding, testing, documentation or management of the code
> >> >>base.
> >> >> +
> >> >> +Non-technical decisions can be made on whichever project mailing
> >>list
> >> >>is
> >> >> most
> >> >> +appropriate.
> >> >> +
> >> >> +Non-technical decisions cannot be vetoed, but if there is strong
> >> >> opposition
> >> >> +a formal vote can be used to resolve the dispute.
> >> >> +
> >> >> +If a formal vote is started for a non-technical decision, the vote
> >> >>will be
> >> >> held
> >> >> +as a lazy 2/3 majority of active committers.
> >> >> +
> >> >> +Any user, contributor, committer or PMC member can initiate a
> >> >> non-technical
> >> >> +decision making process.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Matt Mullins
> >> >> Cloud Platforms Implementation Engineer
> >> >> Worldwide Cloud Services Citrix System, Inc.
> >> >> +1 (407) 920-1107 Office/Cell Phone
> >> >> matt.mullins@citrix.com
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 6/20/13 11:59 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Less terse follow up... ;)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Note that our current by-laws effectively state that any technical
> >> >> >decision
> >> >> >needs to happen on dev@. I am just clarifying the intent.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Note also that we currently do not define what a "technical
> >>decision"
> >> >>is,
> >> >> >but it is my opinion that this is any decision which relates to the
> >> >> >CloudStack source code. (We might want to make it a little broader
> >>than
> >> >> >that. Open to suggestions.)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Almost everything we do involves technology. Whether that is editing
> >> >>the
> >> >> >website, wiki, JIRA, mailing lists, etc. That doesn't mean that
> >>those
> >> >> >activities are "technical activities" or involve "technical
> >>decisions".
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Do you think our by-laws need a section clarifying technical vs.
> >> >> >non-technical? What should it say?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >On 20 June 2013 15:14, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 08:21 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> >> >> >> > Devs,
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I would like to call a vote on the following modification to our
> >> >> >>by-laws.
> >> >> >> > This is in response to the
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Summary of changes:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > * Addition of "3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions" section. This
> >> >>specifies
> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> > non-technical decisions can be made on any appropriate list
> >>(i.e.
> >> >> >> > marketing@)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Erm. Does this mean that marketing can't make any technical
> >>decisions
> >> >> >> about the Web site, for instance?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I think this needs to be better worded.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Best,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> jzb
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Joe Brockmeier
> >> >> >> jzb@zonker.net
> >> >> >> Twitter: @jzb
> >> >> >> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >--
> >> >> >NS
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >NS
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >NS
>
>
--
NS
Re: [VOTE] Update by-laws to add section for non-technical decision
making (Was: Re: [RESULTS][SUMMARY][DISCUSS][VOTE] List CloudStack related
books on the website)
Posted by Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>.
I'm not a committer so I don't want really to take this one on the Bylaws
side. :-)
Matt
On 7/24/13 1:19 PM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>Nope. Sorry. Feel free to run with it. If not, I can see about doing
>another vote in the next few days.
>
>
>On 24 July 2013 18:02, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Noah,
>>
>> Did you ever review / report / re-vote this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matt
>>
>>
>> On 6/25/13 11:17 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> >Thanks for the feedback, Matt.
>> >
>> >Anyone else got any feedback on this? Might cut a new vote.
>> >
>> >
>> >On 24 June 2013 05:12, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Noah,
>> >>
>> >> I agree that there needs to be a delineation. Here's my option on
>> >>wording
>> >> describing what is non-technical:
>> >>
>> >> +3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions
>> >>
>> >> +Non-technical decisions should normally be made by the entire
>>community
>> >> using
>> >> +discussion-lead consensus-building, and not through formal voting.
>> >> +
>> >> +Non-technical decisions are defined as a decision that do not
>>directly
>> >> affect
>> >> +the code in any branch of the project.
>> >> +Including coding, testing, documentation or management of the code
>> >>base.
>> >> +
>> >> +Non-technical decisions can be made on whichever project mailing
>>list
>> >>is
>> >> most
>> >> +appropriate.
>> >> +
>> >> +Non-technical decisions cannot be vetoed, but if there is strong
>> >> opposition
>> >> +a formal vote can be used to resolve the dispute.
>> >> +
>> >> +If a formal vote is started for a non-technical decision, the vote
>> >>will be
>> >> held
>> >> +as a lazy 2/3 majority of active committers.
>> >> +
>> >> +Any user, contributor, committer or PMC member can initiate a
>> >> non-technical
>> >> +decision making process.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Matt Mullins
>> >> Cloud Platforms Implementation Engineer
>> >> Worldwide Cloud Services Citrix System, Inc.
>> >> +1 (407) 920-1107 Office/Cell Phone
>> >> matt.mullins@citrix.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 6/20/13 11:59 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Less terse follow up... ;)
>> >> >
>> >> >Note that our current by-laws effectively state that any technical
>> >> >decision
>> >> >needs to happen on dev@. I am just clarifying the intent.
>> >> >
>> >> >Note also that we currently do not define what a "technical
>>decision"
>> >>is,
>> >> >but it is my opinion that this is any decision which relates to the
>> >> >CloudStack source code. (We might want to make it a little broader
>>than
>> >> >that. Open to suggestions.)
>> >> >
>> >> >Almost everything we do involves technology. Whether that is editing
>> >>the
>> >> >website, wiki, JIRA, mailing lists, etc. That doesn't mean that
>>those
>> >> >activities are "technical activities" or involve "technical
>>decisions".
>> >> >
>> >> >Do you think our by-laws need a section clarifying technical vs.
>> >> >non-technical? What should it say?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >On 20 June 2013 15:14, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 08:21 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> >> >> > Devs,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I would like to call a vote on the following modification to our
>> >> >>by-laws.
>> >> >> > This is in response to the
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Summary of changes:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > * Addition of "3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions" section. This
>> >>specifies
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> > non-technical decisions can be made on any appropriate list
>>(i.e.
>> >> >> > marketing@)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Erm. Does this mean that marketing can't make any technical
>>decisions
>> >> >> about the Web site, for instance?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I think this needs to be better worded.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> jzb
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Joe Brockmeier
>> >> >> jzb@zonker.net
>> >> >> Twitter: @jzb
>> >> >> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >--
>> >> >NS
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >NS
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>NS
Re: [VOTE] Update by-laws to add section for non-technical decision
making (Was: Re: [RESULTS][SUMMARY][DISCUSS][VOTE] List CloudStack related
books on the website)
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Nope. Sorry. Feel free to run with it. If not, I can see about doing
another vote in the next few days.
On 24 July 2013 18:02, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Noah,
>
> Did you ever review / report / re-vote this?
>
> Thanks,
> Matt
>
>
> On 6/25/13 11:17 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the feedback, Matt.
> >
> >Anyone else got any feedback on this? Might cut a new vote.
> >
> >
> >On 24 June 2013 05:12, Mathias Mullins <ma...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Noah,
> >>
> >> I agree that there needs to be a delineation. Here's my option on
> >>wording
> >> describing what is non-technical:
> >>
> >> +3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions
> >>
> >> +Non-technical decisions should normally be made by the entire community
> >> using
> >> +discussion-lead consensus-building, and not through formal voting.
> >> +
> >> +Non-technical decisions are defined as a decision that do not directly
> >> affect
> >> +the code in any branch of the project.
> >> +Including coding, testing, documentation or management of the code
> >>base.
> >> +
> >> +Non-technical decisions can be made on whichever project mailing list
> >>is
> >> most
> >> +appropriate.
> >> +
> >> +Non-technical decisions cannot be vetoed, but if there is strong
> >> opposition
> >> +a formal vote can be used to resolve the dispute.
> >> +
> >> +If a formal vote is started for a non-technical decision, the vote
> >>will be
> >> held
> >> +as a lazy 2/3 majority of active committers.
> >> +
> >> +Any user, contributor, committer or PMC member can initiate a
> >> non-technical
> >> +decision making process.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Matt Mullins
> >> Cloud Platforms Implementation Engineer
> >> Worldwide Cloud Services Citrix System, Inc.
> >> +1 (407) 920-1107 Office/Cell Phone
> >> matt.mullins@citrix.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/20/13 11:59 AM, "Noah Slater" <ns...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Less terse follow up... ;)
> >> >
> >> >Note that our current by-laws effectively state that any technical
> >> >decision
> >> >needs to happen on dev@. I am just clarifying the intent.
> >> >
> >> >Note also that we currently do not define what a "technical decision"
> >>is,
> >> >but it is my opinion that this is any decision which relates to the
> >> >CloudStack source code. (We might want to make it a little broader than
> >> >that. Open to suggestions.)
> >> >
> >> >Almost everything we do involves technology. Whether that is editing
> >>the
> >> >website, wiki, JIRA, mailing lists, etc. That doesn't mean that those
> >> >activities are "technical activities" or involve "technical decisions".
> >> >
> >> >Do you think our by-laws need a section clarifying technical vs.
> >> >non-technical? What should it say?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >On 20 June 2013 15:14, Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 08:21 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> >> >> > Devs,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I would like to call a vote on the following modification to our
> >> >>by-laws.
> >> >> > This is in response to the
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Summary of changes:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > * Addition of "3.4.2. Non-Technical Decisions" section. This
> >>specifies
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > non-technical decisions can be made on any appropriate list (i.e.
> >> >> > marketing@)
> >> >>
> >> >> Erm. Does this mean that marketing can't make any technical decisions
> >> >> about the Web site, for instance?
> >> >>
> >> >> I think this needs to be better worded.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Best,
> >> >>
> >> >> jzb
> >> >> --
> >> >> Joe Brockmeier
> >> >> jzb@zonker.net
> >> >> Twitter: @jzb
> >> >> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >NS
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >NS
>
>
--
NS