Should the bylaws now be "version 2"?
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]>wrote: > I committed the change to the bylaws. Note that I also had to convert the > lazy consensus link to standard html instead of markdown since it was in a > table. > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > This vote passes with 6 +1 votes from PMC members and no other votes. > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Please vote on applying the following changes to the Accumulo bylaws ( > >> http://accumulo.apache.org/bylaws.html). If the "Code Change" action > >> has been removed, it will be reintroduced along with these changes. > >> > >> This vote will remain open for 7 days and requires majority approval to > >> pass. > >> > >> [ ] +1 - "I approve of these proposed bylaw changes and accept them > >> for the Apache > >> Accumulo project." > >> [ ] +0 - "I neither approve nor disapprove of these proposed bylaw > >> changes, > >> but accept them for the Apache Accumulo project." > >> [ ] -1 - "I do not approve of these proposed bylaw changes and do not > >> accept them for the Apache Accumulo project because..." > >> > >> > >> Index: bylaws.mdtext > >> ============================== > >> ===================================== > >> --- bylaws.mdtext (revision 1584734) > >> +++ bylaws.mdtext (working copy) > >> @@ -125,8 +125,15 @@ > >> > >> All participants in the Accumulo project are encouraged to vote. For > >> technical decisions, only the votes of active committers are binding. > >> Non-binding votes are still useful for those with binding votes to > >> understand the perception of an action across the wider Accumulo > community. > >> For PMC decisions, only the votes of active PMC members are binding. > >> > >> -Voting can also be applied to changes to the Accumulo codebase. Please > >> refer to the Accumulo commit and review standard for details. > >> +See the [voting page]( > http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/voting.html) > >> for more details on the mechanics of voting. > >> > >> +<a name="CTR"></a> > >> +## Commit Then Review (CTR) > >> + > >> +Voting can also be applied to changes to the Accumulo codebase. Under > >> the Commit Then Review policy, committers can make changes to the > codebase > >> without seeking approval beforehand, and the changes are assumed to be > >> approved unless an objection is raised. Only if an objection is raised > must > >> a vote take place on the code change. > >> + > >> +For some code changes, committers may wish to get feedback from the > >> community before making the change. It is acceptable for a committer to > >> seek approval before making a change if they so desire. > >> + > >> ## Approvals > >> > >> These are the types of approvals that can be sought. Different actions > >> require different types of approvals. > >> @@ -139,7 +146,7 @@ > >> <tr><td>Majority Approval</td> > >> <td>A majority approval vote passes with 3 binding +1 votes and > more > >> binding +1 votes than -1 votes.</td> > >> <tr><td>Lazy Approval (or Lazy Consensus)</td> > >> - <td>An action with lazy approval is implicitly allowed unless a -1 > >> vote is received, at which time, depending on the type of action, either > >> majority approval or consensus approval must be obtained.</td> > >> + <td>An action with lazy approval is implicitly allowed unless a -1 > >> vote is received, at which time, depending on the type of action, either > >> majority approval or consensus approval must be obtained. Lazy Approval > >> can be either <em>stated</em> or <em>assumed</em>, as detailed on the > [lazy > >> consensus page]( > http://accumulo.apache.org/governance/lazyConsensus.html) > >> .</td> > >> </table> > >> > >> ## Vetoes > >> @@ -152,6 +159,8 @@ > >> > >> This section describes the various actions which are undertaken within > >> the project, the corresponding approval required for that action and > those > >> who have binding votes over the action. It also specifies the minimum > >> length of time that a vote must remain open, measured in days. In > general, > >> votes should not be called at times when it is known that interested > >> members of the project will be unavailable. > >> > >> +For Code Change actions, a committer may choose to employ assumed or > >> stated Lazy Approval under the [CTR](#CTR) policy. Assumed Lazy Approval > >> has no minimum length of time before the change can be made. > >> + > >> <table> > >> <tr><th>Action</th> > >> <th>Description</th> > >> > > > > > -- // Bill Havanki // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions // 443.686.9283
