incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Committer/PPMC votes
Date Fri, 22 Jun 2018 06:35:36 GMT
Roy said a while ago that for (P)PMC votes, a -1 is a veto. It is basically
saying, "I cannot work with this person". And corollary, "I should not have
to".

Cheers,
-g


On Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 20:54 Hen <bayard@apache.org> wrote:

> Interesting.
>
> Foundation-wise, all our votes are Majority Voting (new member vote, board
> vote (ish), votes by the board themselves, omnibus voting). There's little
> expectation/requirement of consensus.
>
> Jakarta/Commons wise new committer votes felt that way (Majority); however
> both of those were large PMCs. Disagreement was more likely than on a
> smaller PMC so the reality was that we needed Majority instead of
> Consensus. The mantra was always "votes on code (technical) had veto,
> everything else was majority". But it was also, to your point, a strong
> culture to avoid relying on majority-overrule of a veto. Thus new release
> votes always felt like Consensus voting even if the rule says Majority
> voting.
>
> I think the release voting (
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes ) is similar to
> new committer votes. It's Majority Voting, but the Release Manager does
> hold a veto. I'd expect a PMC Chair to have a similar role in a new
> committer vote. "As Chair I consider the -1 from Alice to be a blocking
> veto; we need to discuss more". That doesn't work with Podlings though as
> there's no (local) buck-stops-here chair.
>
> It feels like there's an inconsistency between
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html and
> https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html . Either we update
> newcommitter.html to explain that it's a Majority vote, but explain how
> unusual it should be to see -1 after discussion; or voting.html needs
> updating to explain that most (or all?) projects use Consensus voting to
> add committers (and presumably PMC members too).
>
> On most projects using consensus voting for committers/pmc; it feels that
> it's hard to tell the difference. If there are no -1s, a consensus and
> majority vote look the same. :)
>
> Hen
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Way back when each project having a set of bylaws/guidelines was
> > fashionable I looked through them and there is some variation but a -1
> on a
> > committer or PMC member is generally treated as a veto. That being said
> any
> > objections should really come up in the discussion stage (and hopefully
> > mitigated) before a vote is called so a -1 vote should be rare. If you
> look
> > at [1] [2] you see that consensus voting allows for a veto (with a
> reason)
> > and AFAIK most projects use consensus approval when adding committers/PMC
> > members. It may be some don’t realise this as a -1 has never come up.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> >
> > 1. https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > 2. https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message