incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <Ross.Gard...@microsoft.com>
Subject RE: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?
Date Mon, 14 Sep 2015 18:47:56 GMT
The number of votes is unimportant. Anyone not voting is implicitly voting +1 (or maybe +0).
The minimum count of 3 is just to ensure there were enough eyes on formal decisions.

If a podling is struggling to get the require 3 +1s then that is a problem for them mentors
to help address. If you get no reply from your mentors then they are not doing what they are
supposed to do. Send a mail to IPMC indicating you are struggling to get mentor attention.



-----Original Message-----
From: Marko Rodriguez [mailto:okrammarko@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 9:26 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Should Apache VOTEs be in a first-come, first-serve queue?

Hello,

It appears that VOTEing in general@ is inefficient and biased. An Apache member will see a
VOTE on the list and can choose whether to participate in that VOTE or not. I believe there
are problems with this algorithm. The first has to do with efficiency. For instance, Groovy
received (out of my foggy memory) some 20+ VOTEs when only 3 were were needed and other project
VOTEs were sitting around hoping for an Apache member to spend time on their project. Second,
if no Apache member really cares about the project's VOTE, then the project committee is left
"hoping" that someone will care --- pinging around to their mentors (no reply), to the list
("please")... like beggars in the street.

Should general@ have a VOTE queue where if an Apache member has time to VOTE they can only
VOTE on a project at the top of the queue. They can not pick which projects to VOTE on. This
solves the two aforementioned problems:

	1. Apache member attention is not wasted on low-entropy states (why are 20 +1 VOTEs needed
-- no new information is contributed).
		- increased efficiency
	2. Apache member attention is not biased by human whim (why are VOTE requests left idle while
later VOTE requests are satiated).
		- remove human bias

With a VOTE queue, each project's VOTE requirements are met in the order in which the VOTE
was added to the queue and no project is left pinging mentors and the list saying -- "can
someone please VOTE on our artifacts?" 

Thoughts?,
Marko.

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2fmarkorodriguez.com&data=01%7c01%7cRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7c8c037cd3c04c4411dd3808d2bd212197%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=4AgVIce5187AXNV9IaXNSHTXm90Sp%2fcOGlcKnMTrgwo%3d


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message