incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] [VOTE] HCatalog to Graduate and become part of Apache Hive
Date Fri, 15 Feb 2013 07:08:18 GMT
Thanks for the clarification, Roy.


P.S. Almost want them to change to lazy consensus, bc you laying smack
down is full of win.

On 2/14/13 11:38 AM, "Roy T. Fielding" <> wrote:

>It is a majority decision.  In theory, the PMC could decide to
>create special bylaws that would change that to a lazy consensus
>decision, but then I would have to lay the smack down about why
>it is that the US government sucks because supermajorities are
>designed to deny proper governance.
>In the absence of specific rules (like our lazy consensus rule
>on code change voting), you can assume that lazy majority decisions
>are the way that decisions are made at Apache (like releases).
>On Feb 14, 2013, at 9:58 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>> Hey Alan,
>> Great point -- thanks for highlighting the concern, and yes, Benson, I'd
>> like the Incubator PMC to request this clarification from the board.
>> not frustrated with you guys at all and wish you the best. Just trying
>> help (even if it didn't seem like it) based on my existing experience
>> several of Apache's largest umbrella projects :/
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>> On 2/14/13 8:31 AM, "Alan Gates" <> wrote:
>>> I'd like second and extend Benson's point about clarifying how these
>>> things should work.  In addition to clarifying what it means to
>>> into a subproject now that that is frowned upon, clarifying how these
>>> votes work would help.  I think Chris felt that we ignored his vote and
>>> pushed ahead.  From my reading of the docs it was supposed to be a
>>> majority vote and thus to view the -1s as a veto would be to improperly
>>> ignore the 5 +1s.  If the rules were clear in advance for the next
>>> that faces this situation it will help to avoid these misunderstandings
>>> and frustrations.
>>> Alan.
>>> On Feb 14, 2013, at 3:29 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>> I'm not so much opinionated as confused here, perhaps because I have a
>>>> very linear view of governance.
>>>> I like to know how a vote fits into a governance structure or process,
>>>> and I've felt for some time that this case (podling goes to existing
>>>> TLP) is not well-explained by our structure.
>>>> Back in the days when subprojects were normal and valid, the incubator
>>>> had a role on behalf of' an existing TLP in supervising IP and
>>>> community behavior. Graduation meant: "OK, umbrella, we certify that
>>>> these people can behave like a project and have clean IP." And,
>>>> perhaps, the board actually established subprojects? It's all before
>>>> my time.
>>>> Now that subprojects are no longer in the picture, I don't even know
>>>> why the IPMC should ever incubate a podling *if the plan, from the
>>>> start, is to be part of some existing TLP.* So I have assumed that
>>>> HCatalog started out with the intention to grow into an entire TLP,
>>>> and came up with the Hive plan as a fallback.
>>>> To try to make this long story shorter, I think that we should make a
>>>> proposal to the board with a schema for handling this case that makes
>>>> sense in current conditions. I'm happy for it to be your schema, which
>>>> amounts, as I see it, to the board having a supervisory moment when
>>>> this happens, with an IPMC vote providing the same sort of strong
>>>> recommendation one way or the other that it does for establishing a
>>>> TLP.
>>>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Benson,
>>>>> I saw your later email(s) and Incubator board report. It's fine and I
>>>>> think the message of my objection comes across.
>>>>> So thanks for that.
>>>>> One thing I wanted to comment on:
>>>>> On 2/13/13 4:10 AM, "Benson Margulies" <>
>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>> The obvious compromise is to ask them to report the vote result as
>>>>>> 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,
>>>>> Not by my counts. There's a *community* resolution and a
>>>>> recommendation to
>>>>> be made by the IPMC, nonetheless.
>>>>> Otherwise, the IPMC is pretty useless IMO, and more importantly, so
>>>>> the
>>>>> Incubator.
>>>>> Why bother even incubating HCatalog? Hive could have simply svn cp'ed
>>>>> whatever code came in, or whatever code the podling arrived at, and
>>>>> Incubation would have stopped then. But we both know that's not the
>>>>> way it
>>>>> works. Even if a podling graduates to an existing TLP, go check out
>>>>> past resolutions. You'll note there's a section in there that
>>>>> discharges
>>>>> the responsibility of the IPMC for the podling. So, yes, the IPMC
>>>>> involved. And yes, the IPMC vote matters.
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Chris
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> 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:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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