You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com> on 2006/04/27 22:35:28 UTC
Binding votes for a release (was Re: 10.2 release in August?)
actually, there's a good thread on legal-discuss regarding this topic
starting at:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200511.mbox/%3c7edfeeef0511132111r6dd4838vbee6fbe5319b611a@mail.gmail.com%3e
and for anyone's email client that wraps the previous line:
http://tinyurl.com/nunu8
-jean
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
> Michelle Caisse wrote:
>
>>Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>One clarifying procedural note ... voting guidelines for releases are
>>>here:
>>>
>>>http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>
>>>A release requires three binding +1 votes -- db pmc votes are binding
>>>for derby. A -1 expresses an opinion, but can't actually veto a release.
>>>That much said, the community should consider any -1 votes.
>>>
>>
>>Can you point me to where it says that pmc votes are binding for Derby?
>>I see that http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html says "the basic
>>rule is that only PMC members have binding votes", but according to
>>http://db.apache.org/decisions.html, only committers have binding
>>votes. By my reading, Apache gives precedence to the community rules.
>
>
> PMCs fall under ASF guidelines. If you've noticed recent derby vote
> threads, committers and db pmc members are always identified in the
> final result post. We haven't have a situation yet where a derby vote
> had fewer than 3 db pmc votes, so it hasn't been an issue.
>
> -jean
>
>
Re: Binding votes for a release (was Re: 10.2 release in August?)
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com>.
Michelle Caisse wrote:
> Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>> Michelle Caisse wrote:
<snip>
>> Probably it's time to discuss clarifying the DB PMC docs with the DB
>> PMC. Since you're on the DB PMC, I'd encourage you to go ahead and
>> initiate that discussion.
>>
> I agree, and I will do that.
And I meant to say "it's time to discuss clarifying the DB site docs
with the DB PMC ...."
-jean
Re: Binding votes for a release (was Re: 10.2 release in August?)
Posted by Michelle Caisse <Mi...@Sun.COM>.
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>Michelle Caisse wrote:
>
>
> ...
>
>>ready to be released". The Apache guidelines do not cover a vote on a
>>release plan, but the Apache DB site does: "Lazy majority decides each
>>issue in a release plan." Again, according to
>>
>>
>
>I think "lazy majority" in this context refers to lazy concensus, which
>is an alternative to voting; see
>http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus .
>
>
<>http://db.apache.org/decisions.html distinguishes lazy consensus
(vetoable) versus lazy majority (majority wins).
>>http://db.apache.org/decisions.html, the binding votes are cast by
>>committers. Am I missing anything?
>>
>>
>
>Probably it's time to discuss clarifying the DB PMC docs with the DB
>PMC. Since you're on the DB PMC, I'd encourage you to go ahead and
>initiate that discussion.
>
I agree, and I will do that.
-- Michelle
Re: Binding votes for a release (was Re: 10.2 release in August?)
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com>.
Michelle Caisse wrote:
> I want to clarify that the current discussion is about a release plan,
> not a release, so the issue of PMC binding votes is moot for now. It's
Yes, that's correct. That's why I changed the subject from "Re: 10.2
release in August?" to "Binding votes for a release". Sometimes
discussion can get off-topic from the original and it's then good to
modify the subject accordingly.
And this one definitely went further then my original intent, which was
to simply clarify that releases can't be vetoed, unlike code changes. At
any rate, asf culture often liberally sprinkles -1 and +1's throughout
discussions even though no vote has been called.
> my understanding that a release vote is a vote "on whether a package is
> ready to be released". The Apache guidelines do not cover a vote on a
> release plan, but the Apache DB site does: "Lazy majority decides each
> issue in a release plan." Again, according to
I think "lazy majority" in this context refers to lazy concensus, which
is an alternative to voting; see
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus .
> http://db.apache.org/decisions.html, the binding votes are cast by
> committers. Am I missing anything?
Probably it's time to discuss clarifying the DB PMC docs with the DB
PMC. Since you're on the DB PMC, I'd encourage you to go ahead and
initiate that discussion.
-jean
<snipped>
Re: Binding votes for a release (was Re: 10.2 release in August?)
Posted by Michelle Caisse <Mi...@Sun.COM>.
I want to clarify that the current discussion is about a release plan,
not a release, so the issue of PMC binding votes is moot for now. It's
my understanding that a release vote is a vote "on whether a package is
ready to be released". The Apache guidelines do not cover a vote on a
release plan, but the Apache DB site does: "Lazy majority decides each
issue in a release plan." Again, according to
http://db.apache.org/decisions.html, the binding votes are cast by
committers. Am I missing anything?
-- Michelle
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>actually, there's a good thread on legal-discuss regarding this topic
>starting at:
>
>http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200511.mbox/%3c7edfeeef0511132111r6dd4838vbee6fbe5319b611a@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
>and for anyone's email client that wraps the previous line:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/nunu8
>
> -jean
>
>
>Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>
>
>>Michelle Caisse wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>One clarifying procedural note ... voting guidelines for releases are
>>>>here:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>>>>
>>>>A release requires three binding +1 votes -- db pmc votes are binding
>>>>for derby. A -1 expresses an opinion, but can't actually veto a release.
>>>>That much said, the community should consider any -1 votes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Can you point me to where it says that pmc votes are binding for Derby?
>>>I see that http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html says "the basic
>>>rule is that only PMC members have binding votes", but according to
>>>http://db.apache.org/decisions.html, only committers have binding
>>>votes. By my reading, Apache gives precedence to the community rules.
>>>
>>>
>>PMCs fall under ASF guidelines. If you've noticed recent derby vote
>>threads, committers and db pmc members are always identified in the
>>final result post. We haven't have a situation yet where a derby vote
>>had fewer than 3 db pmc votes, so it hasn't been an issue.
>>
>> -jean
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>