Yes, you would need a separate discussion/vote on changes not being reflected in master that you make to a branch (current procedure).
Regarding procedural vote, the decision to start development towards new major release is a longer term decision, not just code change. https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval "Refers to a vote (sense 1) which has completed with at least three binding +1 votes and more +1 votes than -1 votes. ( I.e. , a simple majority with a minimum quorum of three positive votes.) Note that in votes requiring majority approval a -1 vote is simply a vote against, not a veto. Compare Consensus Approval. See also the description of the voting process." For code modifications the rules are different, -1 is a veto that needs to have a valid technical reason why the change cannot be made. Otherwise it is void. None of the -1s in the vote result provide such justification. Thanks, Thomas On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Pramod Immaneni <pra...@datatorrent.com> wrote: > Thomas, > > Wouldn't you need to call a separate procedural vote for whether changes > cannot be allowed into 3.x without requiring they be submitted to 4.x as > there was a disagreement there? Also, I am not sure that the procedural > vote argument can be used here for 4.x given that it involves modifications > to existing code. I would say we should drive towards getting a consensus > by addressing the concerns folks have about 4.x. > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > > > There wasn't any more discussion on this, so here is the result: > > > > 1. Version 4.0 as major version change from 3.x > > ==================================== > > > > +1 (7) > > > > Thomas Weise (PMC) > > Ananth G > > Vlad Rozov (PMC) > > Munagala Ramanath (committer) > > Pramod Immaneni (PMC) > > Sanjay Pujare > > David Yan (PMC) > > > > -1 (3) > > > > Amol Kekre (PMC) > > Sergey Golovko > > Ashwin Chandra Putta (committer) > > > > > > 2. Version 1.0 with simultaneous change of Maven artifact IDs > > =============================================== > > > > +1 (5) > > > > Thomas Weise (PMC) > > Ananth G > > Vlad Rozov (PMC) > > Munagala Ramanath (committer) > > David Yan (PMC) > > > > -1 (5) > > > > Pramod Immaneni (PMC) > > Sanjay Pujare > > Amol Kekre (PMC) > > Sergey Golovko > > Ashwin Chandra Putta (committer) > > > > > > RESULT > > ======= > > > > Vote for option 1 (major version 4.x) *passes* with majority rule [1]. > > > > Thanks, > > Thomas > > > > > > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > This is to formalize the major version change for Malhar discussed in > > [1]. > > > > > > There are two options for major version change. Major version change > will > > > rename legacy packages to org.apache.apex sub packages while retaining > > file > > > history in git. Other cleanup such as removing deprecated code is also > > > expected. > > > > > > 1. Version 4.0 as major version change from 3.x > > > > > > 2. Version 1.0 with simultaneous change of Maven artifact IDs > > > > > > Please refer to the discussion thread [1] for reasoning behind both of > > the > > > options. > > > > > > Please vote on both options. Primary vote for your preferred option, > > > secondary for the other. Secondary vote can be used when counting > primary > > > vote alone isn't conclusive. > > > > > > Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Thomas > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > bd1db8a2d01e23b0c0ab98a785f6ee > > > 9492a1ac9e52d422568a46e5f3@%3Cdev.apex.apache.org%3E > > > > > >
