You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cordova.apache.org by julio cesar sanchez <jc...@gmail.com> on 2018/09/28 08:56:00 UTC
vote duration discrepancy
This is being discussed in slack and github
<https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/issues/202>, but I think it belongs
to the mail list.
There is a discrepancy in the duration of the votes.
Apache states that:
Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours.
But in coho vote templates we have:
Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours.
Also both of them say "at least" or "a minimum", but not sure if sometimes
there can be exceptions to speed things up.
Re: vote duration discrepancy
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
I think security releases have shorter turnaround on votes fueled by the
desire to keep users safe from public disclosure and abuse, but even that
is rare.
On Fri., Sep. 28, 2018, 9:07 a.m. julio cesar sanchez, <
jcesarmobile@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I looked with git blame and the 48 hour message was 5 year old, so
> asking just in case Apache changed it and we missed it. Didn’t know it was
> decided that long ago.
>
> El El vie, 28 sept 2018 a las 17:45, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> escribió:
>
> > FWIW the only reference I see for an emergency (security) patch vote
> > is here: https://httpd.apache.org/dev/voting.html#emergency for the
> > HTTP Server project.
> > However, that document is deemed obsolete. I believe it has been
> > superseded by the Security patch release process.
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:41 PM Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > To be honest I didn't expect the vote to end so fast especially with
> > > the notice "Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours." in the vote
> > > thread itself.
> > > If this was expressed as a duration of 24 hours and expressed as an
> > > emergency (I know it was implied, but for some rules are rules), I
> > > think we would have been fine with that -- but the vote did say 48
> > > hours.On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:35 PM Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jesse sums up what I would have said. We all agreed on the 48 hours
> > > > (somewhere way back), especially with our project with 60+ repos
> where
> > > > we were changing rapidly (not so much now of course), and 72 hours
> was
> > > > too late for a release.
> > > >
> > > > 48 seems to be a good midpoint for the rule to include people from
> all
> > > > geographic timezones. 72 hours would have been OK if we only had to
> do
> > > > one release, like the http server project (that was the genesis of
> the
> > > > foundation itself..)
> > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:21 PM Jesse <pu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > These are guidelines. We make our own rules. The important part is
> > that we make sure we are inclusive of people all around the planet.
> > > > >
> > > > > A hotfix is a different situation, we need to get it out fast and
> > since it is not a significant change, a quick window should be fine.
> > > > >
> > > > > > [1] ... Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least
> > 72 hours to provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to
> participate
> > regardless of their geographic locations. ...
> > > > >
> > > > > ‘Generally’!
> > > > > We shortened this for releases at some point, there is probably a
> > vote thread back there somewhere.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that 72 hours still applies to votes nominating new
> > pmc/committers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Going deeper, I see a trend where we question process and rules. I
> > find this to be a distraction from the actual work. I am of the mind that
> > we are all trustworthy, able to constructively and openly discuss things
> > and this formality can be a barrier to moving forwards. Maybe newer
> > committers need clearer guidelines and I have just been around too long
> to
> > be objective, that is a possibility too.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Jesse
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> >
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/votinhttps://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotesg.html#ReleaseVotes
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sep 28, 2018, at 1:56 AM, julio cesar sanchez <
> > jcesarmobile@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is being discussed in slack and github
> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/issues/202>, but I think
> > it belongs
> > > > > > to the mail list.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is a discrepancy in the duration of the votes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Apache states that:
> > > > > > Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But in coho vote templates we have:
> > > > > > Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also both of them say "at least" or "a minimum", but not sure if
> > sometimes
> > > > > > there can be exceptions to speed things up.
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@cordova.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: vote duration discrepancy
Posted by julio cesar sanchez <jc...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, I looked with git blame and the 48 hour message was 5 year old, so
asking just in case Apache changed it and we missed it. Didn’t know it was
decided that long ago.
El El vie, 28 sept 2018 a las 17:45, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> escribió:
> FWIW the only reference I see for an emergency (security) patch vote
> is here: https://httpd.apache.org/dev/voting.html#emergency for the
> HTTP Server project.
> However, that document is deemed obsolete. I believe it has been
> superseded by the Security patch release process.
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:41 PM Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > To be honest I didn't expect the vote to end so fast especially with
> > the notice "Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours." in the vote
> > thread itself.
> > If this was expressed as a duration of 24 hours and expressed as an
> > emergency (I know it was implied, but for some rules are rules), I
> > think we would have been fine with that -- but the vote did say 48
> > hours.On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:35 PM Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Jesse sums up what I would have said. We all agreed on the 48 hours
> > > (somewhere way back), especially with our project with 60+ repos where
> > > we were changing rapidly (not so much now of course), and 72 hours was
> > > too late for a release.
> > >
> > > 48 seems to be a good midpoint for the rule to include people from all
> > > geographic timezones. 72 hours would have been OK if we only had to do
> > > one release, like the http server project (that was the genesis of the
> > > foundation itself..)
> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:21 PM Jesse <pu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > These are guidelines. We make our own rules. The important part is
> that we make sure we are inclusive of people all around the planet.
> > > >
> > > > A hotfix is a different situation, we need to get it out fast and
> since it is not a significant change, a quick window should be fine.
> > > >
> > > > > [1] ... Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least
> 72 hours to provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate
> regardless of their geographic locations. ...
> > > >
> > > > ‘Generally’!
> > > > We shortened this for releases at some point, there is probably a
> vote thread back there somewhere.
> > > >
> > > > Note that 72 hours still applies to votes nominating new
> pmc/committers.
> > > >
> > > > Going deeper, I see a trend where we question process and rules. I
> find this to be a distraction from the actual work. I am of the mind that
> we are all trustworthy, able to constructively and openly discuss things
> and this formality can be a barrier to moving forwards. Maybe newer
> committers need clearer guidelines and I have just been around too long to
> be objective, that is a possibility too.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Jesse
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/votinhttps://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotesg.html#ReleaseVotes
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Sep 28, 2018, at 1:56 AM, julio cesar sanchez <
> jcesarmobile@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This is being discussed in slack and github
> > > > > <https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/issues/202>, but I think
> it belongs
> > > > > to the mail list.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is a discrepancy in the duration of the votes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Apache states that:
> > > > > Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours.
> > > > >
> > > > > But in coho vote templates we have:
> > > > > Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also both of them say "at least" or "a minimum", but not sure if
> sometimes
> > > > > there can be exceptions to speed things up.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@cordova.apache.org
>
>
Re: vote duration discrepancy
Posted by Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>.
FWIW the only reference I see for an emergency (security) patch vote
is here: https://httpd.apache.org/dev/voting.html#emergency for the
HTTP Server project.
However, that document is deemed obsolete. I believe it has been
superseded by the Security patch release process.
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:41 PM Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> To be honest I didn't expect the vote to end so fast especially with
> the notice "Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours." in the vote
> thread itself.
> If this was expressed as a duration of 24 hours and expressed as an
> emergency (I know it was implied, but for some rules are rules), I
> think we would have been fine with that -- but the vote did say 48
> hours.On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:35 PM Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Jesse sums up what I would have said. We all agreed on the 48 hours
> > (somewhere way back), especially with our project with 60+ repos where
> > we were changing rapidly (not so much now of course), and 72 hours was
> > too late for a release.
> >
> > 48 seems to be a good midpoint for the rule to include people from all
> > geographic timezones. 72 hours would have been OK if we only had to do
> > one release, like the http server project (that was the genesis of the
> > foundation itself..)
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:21 PM Jesse <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > These are guidelines. We make our own rules. The important part is that we make sure we are inclusive of people all around the planet.
> > >
> > > A hotfix is a different situation, we need to get it out fast and since it is not a significant change, a quick window should be fine.
> > >
> > > > [1] ... Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72 hours to provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate regardless of their geographic locations. ...
> > >
> > > ‘Generally’!
> > > We shortened this for releases at some point, there is probably a vote thread back there somewhere.
> > >
> > > Note that 72 hours still applies to votes nominating new pmc/committers.
> > >
> > > Going deeper, I see a trend where we question process and rules. I find this to be a distraction from the actual work. I am of the mind that we are all trustworthy, able to constructively and openly discuss things and this formality can be a barrier to moving forwards. Maybe newer committers need clearer guidelines and I have just been around too long to be objective, that is a possibility too.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Jesse
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/votinhttps://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotesg.html#ReleaseVotes
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sep 28, 2018, at 1:56 AM, julio cesar sanchez <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is being discussed in slack and github
> > > > <https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/issues/202>, but I think it belongs
> > > > to the mail list.
> > > >
> > > > There is a discrepancy in the duration of the votes.
> > > >
> > > > Apache states that:
> > > > Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours.
> > > >
> > > > But in coho vote templates we have:
> > > > Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours.
> > > >
> > > > Also both of them say "at least" or "a minimum", but not sure if sometimes
> > > > there can be exceptions to speed things up.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@cordova.apache.org
Re: vote duration discrepancy
Posted by Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>.
To be honest I didn't expect the vote to end so fast especially with
the notice "Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours." in the vote
thread itself.
If this was expressed as a duration of 24 hours and expressed as an
emergency (I know it was implied, but for some rules are rules), I
think we would have been fine with that -- but the vote did say 48
hours.On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:35 PM Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Jesse sums up what I would have said. We all agreed on the 48 hours
> (somewhere way back), especially with our project with 60+ repos where
> we were changing rapidly (not so much now of course), and 72 hours was
> too late for a release.
>
> 48 seems to be a good midpoint for the rule to include people from all
> geographic timezones. 72 hours would have been OK if we only had to do
> one release, like the http server project (that was the genesis of the
> foundation itself..)
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:21 PM Jesse <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > These are guidelines. We make our own rules. The important part is that we make sure we are inclusive of people all around the planet.
> >
> > A hotfix is a different situation, we need to get it out fast and since it is not a significant change, a quick window should be fine.
> >
> > > [1] ... Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72 hours to provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate regardless of their geographic locations. ...
> >
> > ‘Generally’!
> > We shortened this for releases at some point, there is probably a vote thread back there somewhere.
> >
> > Note that 72 hours still applies to votes nominating new pmc/committers.
> >
> > Going deeper, I see a trend where we question process and rules. I find this to be a distraction from the actual work. I am of the mind that we are all trustworthy, able to constructively and openly discuss things and this formality can be a barrier to moving forwards. Maybe newer committers need clearer guidelines and I have just been around too long to be objective, that is a possibility too.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jesse
> >
> > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/votinhttps://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotesg.html#ReleaseVotes
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 28, 2018, at 1:56 AM, julio cesar sanchez <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > This is being discussed in slack and github
> > > <https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/issues/202>, but I think it belongs
> > > to the mail list.
> > >
> > > There is a discrepancy in the duration of the votes.
> > >
> > > Apache states that:
> > > Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours.
> > >
> > > But in coho vote templates we have:
> > > Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours.
> > >
> > > Also both of them say "at least" or "a minimum", but not sure if sometimes
> > > there can be exceptions to speed things up.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@cordova.apache.org
Re: vote duration discrepancy
Posted by Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>.
Jesse sums up what I would have said. We all agreed on the 48 hours
(somewhere way back), especially with our project with 60+ repos where
we were changing rapidly (not so much now of course), and 72 hours was
too late for a release.
48 seems to be a good midpoint for the rule to include people from all
geographic timezones. 72 hours would have been OK if we only had to do
one release, like the http server project (that was the genesis of the
foundation itself..)
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:21 PM Jesse <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> These are guidelines. We make our own rules. The important part is that we make sure we are inclusive of people all around the planet.
>
> A hotfix is a different situation, we need to get it out fast and since it is not a significant change, a quick window should be fine.
>
> > [1] ... Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72 hours to provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate regardless of their geographic locations. ...
>
> ‘Generally’!
> We shortened this for releases at some point, there is probably a vote thread back there somewhere.
>
> Note that 72 hours still applies to votes nominating new pmc/committers.
>
> Going deeper, I see a trend where we question process and rules. I find this to be a distraction from the actual work. I am of the mind that we are all trustworthy, able to constructively and openly discuss things and this formality can be a barrier to moving forwards. Maybe newer committers need clearer guidelines and I have just been around too long to be objective, that is a possibility too.
>
> Cheers,
> Jesse
>
> [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/votinhttps://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotesg.html#ReleaseVotes
>
>
> > On Sep 28, 2018, at 1:56 AM, julio cesar sanchez <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This is being discussed in slack and github
> > <https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/issues/202>, but I think it belongs
> > to the mail list.
> >
> > There is a discrepancy in the duration of the votes.
> >
> > Apache states that:
> > Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours.
> >
> > But in coho vote templates we have:
> > Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours.
> >
> > Also both of them say "at least" or "a minimum", but not sure if sometimes
> > there can be exceptions to speed things up.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@cordova.apache.org
Re: vote duration discrepancy
Posted by Jesse <pu...@gmail.com>.
These are guidelines. We make our own rules. The important part is that we make sure we are inclusive of people all around the planet.
A hotfix is a different situation, we need to get it out fast and since it is not a significant change, a quick window should be fine.
> [1] ... Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72 hours to provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate regardless of their geographic locations. ...
‘Generally’!
We shortened this for releases at some point, there is probably a vote thread back there somewhere.
Note that 72 hours still applies to votes nominating new pmc/committers.
Going deeper, I see a trend where we question process and rules. I find this to be a distraction from the actual work. I am of the mind that we are all trustworthy, able to constructively and openly discuss things and this formality can be a barrier to moving forwards. Maybe newer committers need clearer guidelines and I have just been around too long to be objective, that is a possibility too.
Cheers,
Jesse
[1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/votinhttps://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotesg.html#ReleaseVotes
> On Sep 28, 2018, at 1:56 AM, julio cesar sanchez <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is being discussed in slack and github
> <https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/issues/202>, but I think it belongs
> to the mail list.
>
> There is a discrepancy in the duration of the votes.
>
> Apache states that:
> Release votes SHOULD remain open for at least 72 hours.
>
> But in coho vote templates we have:
> Voting will go on for a minimum of 48 hours.
>
> Also both of them say "at least" or "a minimum", but not sure if sometimes
> there can be exceptions to speed things up.