incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] HCatalog to Graduate and become part of Apache Hive
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:10:58 GMT

The obvious compromise is to ask them to report the vote result as it
happened, it seems to me, -1's and all. But where do you think that
they are reporting anything? There's nothing happening here at the
board level. There's no board resolution needed for a Hive committer
to type 'svn cp' on the hcatalog tree, nor for the Hive PMC to set up
some worrisome umbrellaesque structure of internal bylaws. When the
Hive PMC reports this after the fact, the board might response.

Having written all this, please feel free to add whatever version of
this you would like to the general remarks of the February report wiki
page, where I will leave it unscathed.


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<> wrote:
> Classifying this as a procedural vote gives the easy out of majority rule.
> It is the IPMC's recommendation to the board that the board then evaluates
> to become a TLP or not. Based on Benson's later email he is shucking all
> of that to the board. Benson, I would hope you consider -1s to be VETO in
> this case, or at the very least, noting that in your report should you
> still bull ahead and recommend it. BTW for everyone's benefit, go look up
> the # of times that people -1 graduations. It's VERY rare, so I hope this
> an indication that there is something seriously up here. I have nothing
> against Hive or HCatalog -- I simply am trying to intimate this will be
> trouble down the road.
> In the end, yes, it's the board, but it's on the recommendation of the
> IPMC. It would be pretty lame if  the IPMC made the recommendation to
> create HCatalog as a part of Hive per the requested method and they didn't
> mention the 2 objections (mine which I strongly consider a VETO) and Chris
> D.'s -0.
> Chris
> On 2/12/13 5:14 PM, "Alan Gates" <> wrote:
>>So I'm not clear what the next step is here.  The 72 hours have passed,
>>we have 5 +1 votes, 2 -1 votes, and a -0.
>>Based on this page this
>>appears to be a procedural vote so it just requires a majority.
>>Are we done or is it traditional to allow more time for the vote when the
>>issue is contentious?
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message