Agree with this. The release requirements should be part of the bylaws, the ancillary documentation can be passed over. On Apr 7, 2014 12:00 PM, "Bill Havanki" <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 on the first three. We should keep that distinction for future revisions > - if something sounds more like a rule, it should go into a bylaw-ish doc > instead. > > The release guide has a lot of how-to stuff which I think isn't > bylaw-worthy. Some elements, like the required tests for releases, probably > are. > > (I'll be sure to add links to the governance pages to the nav menu in the > site redesign. It's good info but harder to find.) > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > We have the following pages in the governance section of our website: > > > > http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/voting.html > > http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/consensusBuilding.html > > http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/lazyConsensus.html > > http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/releasing.html > > > > In my opinion, the first three (covering mechanics of voting, consensus > > building, and lazy consensus) are more like definitions / how-to guides > for > > their respective topics, rather than being policy rules specifically > > adopted by the Accumulo project. For this reason, I don't think > > modifications to these pages should be treated the same way as bylaws > > changes. They can be treated as code change actions, as we handle the > rest > > of the website. > > > > The release guidelines are different, however. We should decide whether > > they are effectively part of our bylaws and can only be changed with a > > bylaws change action; or whether they are more like the rest of our > > documentation and code, meaning they can be modified with a code change > > action. > > > > > > -- > // Bill Havanki > // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions > // 443.686.9283 >
