incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacques Nadeau <>
Subject Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator
Date Wed, 02 Dec 2015 02:53:55 GMT
A few thoughts from a 'bystander':

It's great that Greg and the others who disagree cast their dissenting
votes. That doesn't mean that we should throw out process. If the process
is 3x+1 and more +1 than -1, this vote passes as Henry stated. Greg even
stated (if I understand his statements correctly) that he was not trying to
sink this vote but rather to express his dissent.

RTC versus CTR is clearly a religious debate. There are a large number of
successful and vibrant Apache communities using each paradigm. I don't
think this new community can address those -1's unless they switched
religious sides. That seems to be an unfair ask given their desires and the
general split on this topic within the broader Apache membership. (In other
words, short of switching to CTR, it seems like these -1's would stand.)

Adding additional mentors seems to be a late suggestion and unwarranted.
The mentors on this proposal have strong Apache credentials and there is
reasonable diversity among them.

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ralph Goers <>
> wrote:
> > The only mention of consensus I could find is in the actual development
> of the actual
> > proposal. I’m sure one could argue that that implies that whether
> consensus is achieved
> > is by the vote, but with a group as large as the IPMC it would be
> horrible to allow a
> > single vote to block a podling from entering.
> Right. But imagine if INFRA representative cast -1 because we don't
> have resources
> to accommodate the poddling will we still use simple majority?
> To me this highlights a very fundamental problem with an incubator:
> give the size
> of the PMC if we start allowing simple majority to just "happen"
> without any semblance
> of trying to address concerns by a compromise of some sorts -- we're
> running a significant
> risk of never EVER be able to say NO to a podling when we need to.
> I have not seen folks proposing Impala considering any compromise that
> would
> alleviate concerns that were articulated by -1 votes. I see a lot of
> 'this is our way -- we
> don't want to change' attitude. That is *precisely* why I personally
> cast a -1, btw.
> Now, if you're looking for ideas on how a compromise would look like
> things like
> inviting more diverse set of mentors, etc may be a good place to start
> (I'm obviously
> brainstorming here).
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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