Probably worth linking to the apache CoC in our wiki if we haven't already.
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 2:31 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote:
> > On Jun 25, 2020, at 8:28 AM, Joshua McKenzie
> wrote:
> >
> > Dinesh - I expect to see a [DISCUSS] thread from you about our CoC
> shortly.
> > :)
> >
>
> I am
> On Jun 25, 2020, at 8:28 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
> Dinesh - I expect to see a [DISCUSS] thread from you about our CoC shortly.
> :)
>
I am satisfied with Benedict's clarification. ASF CoC and processes outlined in
there are fine.
Dinesh
> ~Josh
>
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 4:17 AM
Vote results:
Binding +1's: 17
Binding +0's: 1
Binding -1's: 0
Non-binding +1's: 9
Non-binding +0's: 1
Non-binding -1's: 0
The vote passes.
pmc quorum for the next six months (or whatever cadence we decide to roll
call on) will be 18, with low watermark of simple majority to pass pmc
votes
The purpose of this document is to define only how the project makes decisions,
and it lists "tenets" of conduct only as a preamble for interpreting the rules
on decision-making. The authors' intent was to lean on this to minimise the
rigidity and prescriptiveness in the formulation of the
> On Jun 24, 2020, at 6:01 PM, Brandon Williams wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 5:43 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote:
>> 1. How/Who/Where are we planning to deal with Code of Conduct violations? I
>> assume this should be private@ but the document does not call it out as
>> such. We should call it
> On Jun 25, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Jordan West wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:43 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote:
>
>> 3. Discussion #3 - "... 1 business day notice period." Whose business day
>> is it? US? Europe? Australia? NZ? We are a distributed community and so 1
>> business day is
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 5:43 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote:
> 1. How/Who/Where are we planning to deal with Code of Conduct violations? I
> assume this should be private@ but the document does not call it out as such.
> We should call it out explicitly as part of the PMC responsibilities. We
> should
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 3:43 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote:
> 3. Discussion #3 - "... 1 business day notice period." Whose business day
> is it? US? Europe? Australia? NZ? We are a distributed community and so 1
> business day is ambiguous. ASF typically states a 48-72 hour period which
> gives enough
+0
I realize this is a vote thread and I am late for feedback but I wanted to
point out a couple things:
1. How/Who/Where are we planning to deal with Code of Conduct violations? I
assume this should be private@ but the document does not call it out as such.
We should call it out explicitly
+1
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 8:37 AM Jake Luciani wrote:
> +1 (b)
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:59 AM Joshua McKenzie
> wrote:
>
> > A reminder: this vote will close at midnight PST today in roughly 17
> hours.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 2:20 PM J. D. Jordan
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
+1 (b)
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:59 AM Joshua McKenzie
wrote:
> A reminder: this vote will close at midnight PST today in roughly 17 hours.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 2:20 PM J. D. Jordan
> wrote:
>
> > +1 non-binding
> >
> > > On Jun 22, 2020, at 1:18 PM, Stefan Podkowinski
> wrote:
> > >
A reminder: this vote will close at midnight PST today in roughly 17 hours.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 2:20 PM J. D. Jordan
wrote:
> +1 non-binding
>
> > On Jun 22, 2020, at 1:18 PM, Stefan Podkowinski wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> >> On 22.06.20 20:12, Blake Eggleston wrote:
> >> +1
> >>
> On
+1 non-binding
> On Jun 22, 2020, at 1:18 PM, Stefan Podkowinski wrote:
>
> +1
>
>> On 22.06.20 20:12, Blake Eggleston wrote:
>> +1
>>
On Jun 20, 2020, at 8:12 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>>>
>>> Link to doc:
>>>
+1
On 22.06.20 20:12, Blake Eggleston wrote:
+1
On Jun 20, 2020, at 8:12 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
Link to doc:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
Change since previous cancelled vote:
"A simple majority of this electorate becomes the
+1
> On Jun 20, 2020, at 8:12 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
> Link to doc:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
>
> Change since previous cancelled vote:
> "A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark for votes
> in
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 3:23 AM Benedict Elliott Smith
wrote:
>
> If you read the clauses literally there's no conflict - not all committers
> that +1 the change need to review the work. It just means that two
> committers have indicated they are comfortable with the patch being merged.
>
+1 (nb)
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 17:15, Eric Evans wrote:
> +0
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie
> wrote:
> >
> > Link to doc:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
> >
> > Change since previous cancelled vote:
> > "A
+0
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
> Link to doc:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
>
> Change since previous cancelled vote:
> "A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark for votes
> in
+1
> On 20 Jun 2020, at 16:12, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
> Link to doc:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
>
> Change since previous cancelled vote:
> "A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark for votes
> in favour
Also, +1
On 22/06/2020, 11:23, "Benedict Elliott Smith" wrote:
If you read the clauses literally there's no conflict - not all committers
that +1 the change need to review the work. It just means that two committers
have indicated they are comfortable with the patch being merged. One
If you read the clauses literally there's no conflict - not all committers that
+1 the change need to review the work. It just means that two committers have
indicated they are comfortable with the patch being merged. One of the +1s
could be based on another pre-existing review and trust in
+1
> On 22 Jun 2020, at 08:54, Sylvain Lebresne wrote:
>
> +1
> --
> Sylvain
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 9:48 AM Benjamin Lerer
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 8:54 AM Marcus Eriksson
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22 June 2020 at 08:37:39, Mick Semb Wever
+1
--
Sylvain
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 9:48 AM Benjamin Lerer
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 8:54 AM Marcus Eriksson
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On 22 June 2020 at 08:37:39, Mick Semb Wever (m...@apache.org) wrote:
> >
> > > - Vote will run through 6/24/20
> > > - pmc votes
+1
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 8:54 AM Marcus Eriksson wrote:
> +1
>
>
> On 22 June 2020 at 08:37:39, Mick Semb Wever (m...@apache.org) wrote:
>
> > - Vote will run through 6/24/20
> > - pmc votes considered binding
> > - simple majority of binding participants passes the vote
> > - committer and
+1
On 22 June 2020 at 08:37:39, Mick Semb Wever (m...@apache.org) wrote:
> - Vote will run through 6/24/20
> - pmc votes considered binding
> - simple majority of binding participants passes the vote
> - committer and community votes considered advisory
+1 (binding)
>- Vote will run through 6/24/20
>- pmc votes considered binding
>- simple majority of binding participants passes the vote
>- committer and community votes considered advisory
+1 (binding)
-
To unsubscribe,
The way I've heard it articulated (and makes sense to me) is that a 2nd
committer skimming a contribution to make sure everything looks reasonable
should be sufficient. It's a touch more rigor than we do now (1 contrib + 1
committer) without slowing things down too much. If we can develop a
+1
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 3:12 AM Joshua McKenzie
wrote:
> Link to doc:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
>
> Change since previous cancelled vote:
> "A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark for votes
> in
+1 (nb).
Thank you Josh for advocating for these changes!
I am curious about how Code Contribution Guideline #2 reading "Code
modifications must have been reviewed by at least one other
contributor" and Guideline #3 reading "Code modifications require two
+1 committer votes (can be author +
+1 binding
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 11:24 AM Jordan West wrote:
> +1 (nb)
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:13 AM Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Link to doc:
> > >
> > >
> >
>
+1 (nb)
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:13 AM Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> +1
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie
> wrote:
>
> > Link to doc:
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
> >
> > Change since previous cancelled vote:
+1
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie
wrote:
> Link to doc:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
>
> Change since previous cancelled vote:
> "A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark for votes
> in
+1 nb
From: Scott Andreas
Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2020 11:00:15 AM
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Project governance wiki doc (take 2)
+1 nb
> On Jun 20, 2020, at 9:37 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
> +1 (binding / present
+1 nb
> On Jun 20, 2020, at 9:37 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
> +1 (binding / present / active)
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:23 PM Ekaterina Dimitrova
> wrote:
>
>> +1(non-binding)
>>
>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 11:38, Brandon Williams wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 10:12
+1 (binding / present / active)
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:23 PM Ekaterina Dimitrova
wrote:
> +1(non-binding)
>
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 11:38, Brandon Williams wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Link to doc:
> > >
> > >
> >
>
+1(non-binding)
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 11:38, Brandon Williams wrote:
> +1
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie
> wrote:
>
> > Link to doc:
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
> >
> > Change since previous cancelled
+1
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 10:12 AM Joshua McKenzie wrote:
> Link to doc:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
>
> Change since previous cancelled vote:
> "A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark for votes
> in favour
+1 (nb)
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 23:18, Jeff Jirsa wrote:
> +1 (and present?)
>
>
> > On Jun 20, 2020, at 8:12 AM, Joshua McKenzie
> wrote:
> >
> > Link to doc:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
> >
> > Change since previous
+1 (and present?)
> On Jun 20, 2020, at 8:12 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
> Link to doc:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
>
> Change since previous cancelled vote:
> "A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark
Link to doc:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/Apache+Cassandra+Project+Governance
Change since previous cancelled vote:
"A simple majority of this electorate becomes the low-watermark for votes
in favour necessary to pass a motion, with new PMC members added to the
40 matches
Mail list logo
