leandron commented on code in PR #102: URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/102#discussion_r1284351448
########## rfcs/0102-clarify-strategy-decision-process.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +Authors: @tqchen + +- Feature Name: [Process RFC] Clarify Community Strategy Decision Process +- Start Date: 2023-08-03 +- RFC PR: [apache/tvm-rfcs#0102](https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/0102) +- GitHub Issue: [apache/tvm#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/0000) + +## Summary + +Machine Learning Compilation (MLC) is an emerging field in fast development. +With the tremendous help from the whole community, it’s exciting to see that TVM delivers significant needs from and to +developers and thus has become widely popular in both academia and industry. + +As the community pushes for different goals that help each other, naturally, there +are strategy decision points about overall directions and new modules adoptions. +These decisions are not fine-grained code-level changes but are important for a +community to be viable in the long term. +The process of bringing those changes is less clarified to the community, and hurdles can be high. +We have made attempts in the past to bring a more verbose processes, but this has proven to be less successful. Review Comment: Can this line be expanded with what specific processes this refers to and why they were *proven* to be less successful? ########## rfcs/0102-clarify-strategy-decision-process.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +Authors: @tqchen + +- Feature Name: [Process RFC] Clarify Community Strategy Decision Process +- Start Date: 2023-08-03 +- RFC PR: [apache/tvm-rfcs#0102](https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/0102) +- GitHub Issue: [apache/tvm#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/0000) + +## Summary + +Machine Learning Compilation (MLC) is an emerging field in fast development. +With the tremendous help from the whole community, it’s exciting to see that TVM delivers significant needs from and to +developers and thus has become widely popular in both academia and industry. + +As the community pushes for different goals that help each other, naturally, there +are strategy decision points about overall directions and new modules adoptions. +These decisions are not fine-grained code-level changes but are important for a +community to be viable in the long term. +The process of bringing those changes is less clarified to the community, and hurdles can be high. +We have made attempts in the past to bring a more verbose processes, but this has proven to be less successful. +One observation is that it is hard for broader volunteer developers and community members to follow complicated processes. Review Comment: Can you clarify which evidence we have to support this statement? ########## rfcs/0102-clarify-strategy-decision-process.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +Authors: @tqchen + +- Feature Name: [Process RFC] Clarify Community Strategy Decision Process +- Start Date: 2023-08-03 +- RFC PR: [apache/tvm-rfcs#0102](https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/0102) +- GitHub Issue: [apache/tvm#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/0000) + +## Summary + +Machine Learning Compilation (MLC) is an emerging field in fast development. +With the tremendous help from the whole community, it’s exciting to see that TVM delivers significant needs from and to +developers and thus has become widely popular in both academia and industry. + +As the community pushes for different goals that help each other, naturally, there +are strategy decision points about overall directions and new modules adoptions. +These decisions are not fine-grained code-level changes but are important for a +community to be viable in the long term. +The process of bringing those changes is less clarified to the community, and hurdles can be high. +We have made attempts in the past to bring a more verbose processes, but this has proven to be less successful. +One observation is that it is hard for broader volunteer developers and community members to follow complicated processes. +Additionally, different members can have different interpretations of how to do things, +leading to stagnation and lack of participation from volunteer members. + +We are in a different world now in the case of ML/AI ecosystem, and it is critical for +the community to be able to make collective decisions together and empower the community. +Following the practices of existing ASF projects (e.g. hadoop), we propose to use a simple process for strategic decisions. + +## Proposal: Strategy Decision Process + +We propose the following clarification of the strategy decision process: +It takes lazy 2/3 majority (at least 3 votes and twice as many +1 votes as -1 votes) +of binding decisions to make strategic decisions in the TVM community, including: + +- Adoption of a guidance-level community strategy to enable new directions or overall project evolution. +- Establishment of a new module in the project. +- Adoption of a new codebase: When the codebase for an existing, released product is to be replaced with an alternative codebase. + If such a vote fails to gain approval, the existing code base will continue. This also covers the creation of new sub-projects within the project. Review Comment: It would be good, as we will be eventually voting on this RFC, that the proposal becomes more specific on what it is talking about. The current text is a bit vague on what the 2/3 votes majority applies to. I'm particularly concerned about the terminology "including:", as it seems too open ended. I suggest coming up with a specific list of well defined items that 2/3 votes apply. ########## rfcs/0102-clarify-strategy-decision-process.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +Authors: @tqchen + +- Feature Name: [Process RFC] Clarify Community Strategy Decision Process Review Comment: I think the title is a bit unclear as this RFC is not "clarifying" the voting process. It is, in practice, changing from the process we currently follow from Apache that requires consensus for any technical contribution, moving into a 2/3 majority for an open ended list of topics, so perhaps the word "Clarify" should be removed from this title. ########## rfcs/0102-clarify-strategy-decision-process.md: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +Authors: @tqchen + +- Feature Name: [Process RFC] Clarify Community Strategy Decision Process +- Start Date: 2023-08-03 +- RFC PR: [apache/tvm-rfcs#0102](https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/0102) +- GitHub Issue: [apache/tvm#0000](https://github.com/apache/tvm/issues/0000) + +## Summary + +Machine Learning Compilation (MLC) is an emerging field in fast development. +With the tremendous help from the whole community, it’s exciting to see that TVM delivers significant needs from and to +developers and thus has become widely popular in both academia and industry. + +As the community pushes for different goals that help each other, naturally, there +are strategy decision points about overall directions and new modules adoptions. +These decisions are not fine-grained code-level changes but are important for a +community to be viable in the long term. +The process of bringing those changes is less clarified to the community, and hurdles can be high. +We have made attempts in the past to bring a more verbose processes, but this has proven to be less successful. +One observation is that it is hard for broader volunteer developers and community members to follow complicated processes. +Additionally, different members can have different interpretations of how to do things, +leading to stagnation and lack of participation from volunteer members. + +We are in a different world now in the case of ML/AI ecosystem, and it is critical for +the community to be able to make collective decisions together and empower the community. +Following the practices of existing ASF projects (e.g. hadoop), we propose to use a simple process for strategic decisions. + +## Proposal: Strategy Decision Process + +We propose the following clarification of the strategy decision process: +It takes lazy 2/3 majority (at least 3 votes and twice as many +1 votes as -1 votes) +of binding decisions to make strategic decisions in the TVM community, including: + +- Adoption of a guidance-level community strategy to enable new directions or overall project evolution. +- Establishment of a new module in the project. Review Comment: Establishment of new modules in the project is the main subject of the very detailed (ongoing) RFC https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/95, so I'm wondering what's the strategy here. Do we want to close that RFC as rejected and expand this one, or remove this point from here and continue the discussion on https://github.com/apache/tvm-rfcs/pull/95? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
