+1 (binding)
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Harrison Sheinblatt <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Michael Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: >> > This is a vote on the following proposal for bylaws: >> > >> > https://gerrit.cloudera.org/#/c/3669/2 >> > >> > The vote is to be done by "Lazy Consensus". Active PMC members, >> > according to http://incubator.apache.org/projects/impala.html, may >> > vote. The vote will be open 72 hours and will pass if there are "3 >> > binding +1 votes and more binding +1 votes than -1 votes." >> > >> > +++++ >> > >> > I am not on the PPMC, so my vote is non-binding. Here it is anyway, as >> > according to our draft bylaws, "Non binding votes are still useful for >> > those with binding votes to understand the perception of an action in >> > the wider Impala community." >> > >> > (Non-binding) +1. >> > >> > My reasoning is that these bylaws are probably not utterly bonkers, >> > since they are mostly what Hadoop uses, and they are easy to change if >> > anyone finds something problematic. Additionally, since many of us in >> > the Impala community are new to The Apache Way, having a document that >> > spells things out (like how voting works) will, I hope, serve as a >> > helpful foundation. >> > >> > +++ >> > >> > Here is a plain-text copy of the patch for mailing-list archival >> purposes: >> > >> > +++ >> > >> > Apache Impala (incubating) Project Bylaws >> > >> > Introduction >> > >> > This document defines the bylaws under which the Apache Impala >> > (incubating) project operates. It defines the roles and >> > responsibilities of the project, who may vote, how voting works, how >> > conflicts are resolved, etc. >> > >> > Impala is a project of the Apache Software Foundation. The foundation >> > holds the trademark on the name "Impala" and copyright on Apache code >> > including the code in the Impala codebase. The foundation FAQ explains >> > the operation and background of the foundation. >> > >> > Impala is typical of Apache projects in that it operates under a set >> > of principles, known collectively as the "Apache Way". If you are new >> > to Apache development, please refer to the Incubator project for more >> > information on how Apache projects operate. >> > >> > Roles and Responsibilities >> > >> > Apache projects define a set of roles with associated rights and >> > responsibilities. These roles govern what tasks an individual may >> > perform within the project. The roles are defined in the following >> > sections >> > >> > Users >> > The most important participants in the project are people who use our >> software. >> > >> > Users contribute to the Apache projects by providing feedback to >> > developers in the form of bug reports and feature suggestions. As >> > well, users participate in the Apache community by helping other users >> > on mailing lists and user support forums. >> > >> > Contributors >> > All of the volunteers who are contributing time, code, documentation, >> > or resources to the Impala Project. A contributor that makes >> > sustained, welcome contributions to the project may be invited to >> > become a Committer, though the exact timing of such invitations >> > depends on many factors. >> > >> > Committers >> > The project's Committers are responsible for the project's technical >> > management. Committers have write access to the project's version >> > control repositories. Committers may cast binding votes on any >> > technical discussion. >> > >> > Committer access is by invitation only and must be approved by >> > consensus approval of the active PMC members. A Committer is >> > considered emeritus by their own declaration or by not contributing in >> > any form to the project for over six months. An emeritus committer may >> > request reinstatement of commit access from the PMC. Such >> > reinstatement is subject to consensus approval of active PMC members. >> > >> > Significant, pervasive features may be developed in a speculative >> > branch of the repository. The PMC may grant commit rights on the >> > branch to its consistent contributors for the duration of the >> > initiative. Branch committers are responsible for shepherding their >> > feature into an active release and do not cast binding votes or vetoes >> > in the project. >> > >> > All Apache committers are required to have a signed Contributor >> > License Agreement (CLA) on file with the Apache Software Foundation. >> > There is a Committer FAQ which provides more details on the >> > requirements for Committers >> > >> > A committer who makes a sustained contribution to the project may be >> > invited to become a member of the PMC. The form of contribution is not >> > limited to code. It can also include code review, helping out users on >> > the mailing lists, documentation, testing, etc. >> > >> > Release Manager >> > A Release Manager (RM) is a committer who volunteers to produce a >> > Release Candidate according to HowToRelease. The RM shall publish a >> > Release Plan on the dev@ list stating the branch from which they >> > intend to make a Release Candidate, at least one week before they do >> > so. The RM is responsible for building consensus around the content of >> > the Release Candidate, in order to achieve a successful Product >> > Release vote. >> > >> > Project Management Committee >> > The Project Management Committee (PMC) is responsible to the board and >> > the ASF for the management and oversight of the Apache Impala >> > codebase. The responsibilities of the PMC include >> > >> > Deciding what is distributed as products of the Apache Impala project. >> > In particular all releases must be approved by the PMC >> > Maintaining the project's shared resources, including the codebase >> > repository, mailing lists, and websites. >> > Speaking on behalf of the project. >> > Resolving license disputes regarding products of the project >> > Nominating new PMC members and committers >> > Maintaining these bylaws and other guidelines of the project >> > Membership of the PMC is by invitation only and must be approved by a >> > consensus approval of active PMC members. A PMC member is considered >> > "emeritus" by their own declaration or by not contributing in any form >> > to the project for over six months. An emeritus member may request >> > reinstatement to the PMC. Such reinstatement is subject to consensus >> > approval of the active PMC members. >> > >> > The chair of the PMC is appointed by the ASF board. The chair is an >> > office holder of the Apache Software Foundation (Vice President, >> > Apache Impala) and has primary responsibility to the board for the >> > management of the projects within the scope of the Impala PMC. The >> > chair reports to the board quarterly on developments within the Impala >> > project. >> > >> > The chair of the PMC is rotated annually. When the chair is rotated or >> > if the current chair of the PMC resigns, the PMC votes to recommend a >> > new chair using Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting. See BoardVoting >> > for specifics. The decision must be ratified by the Apache board. >> > >> > Decision Making >> > >> > Within the Impala project, different types of decisions require >> > different forms of approval. For example, the previous section >> > describes several decisions which require "consensus approval" >> > approval. This section defines how voting is performed, the types of >> > approvals, and which types of decision require which type of approval. >> > >> > Voting >> > Decisions regarding the project are made by votes on the primary >> > project development mailing list ([email protected]). >> > Where necessary, PMC voting may take place on the private Impala PMC >> > mailing list. Votes are clearly indicated by subject line starting >> > with [VOTE]. Votes may contain multiple items for approval and these >> > should be clearly separated. Voting is carried out by replying to the >> > vote mail. Voting may take four flavors >> > >> > +1 "Yes," "Agree," or "the action should be performed." In general, >> > this vote also indicates a willingness on the behalf of the voter in >> > "making it happen" >> > +0 This vote indicates a willingness for the action under >> > consideration to go ahead. The voter, however will not be able to >> > help. >> > -0 This vote indicates that the voter does not, in general, agree with >> > the proposed action but is not concerned enough to prevent the action >> > going ahead. >> > -1 This is a negative vote. On issues where consensus is required, >> > this vote counts as a veto. All vetoes must contain an explanation of >> > why the veto is appropriate. Vetoes with no explanation are void. It >> > may also be appropriate for a -1 vote to include an alternative course >> > of action. >> > Patches are reviewed in the code review tool, where the vote flavors are: >> > >> > +2 "I am confident in the change and this can be committed without >> > further review after addressing the remaining points I have made." >> > +1 "I am OK with this being committed after the remaining points in my >> > comment have been addressed and someone else votes +2." >> > -1 "I oppose this being committed." >> > All participants in the Impala project are encouraged to show their >> > agreement with or against a particular action by voting. 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 in the wider Impala community. >> > For PMC decisions, only the votes of PMC members are binding. >> > >> > Approvals >> > These are the types of approvals that can be sought. Different actions >> > require different types of approvals >> > >> > Consensus Approval - Consensus approval requires 3 binding +1 votes >> > and no binding vetoes. >> > Lazy Consensus - Lazy consensus requires no -1 votes ('silence gives >> assent'). >> > Lazy Majority - A lazy majority vote requires 3 binding +1 votes and >> > more binding +1 votes than -1 votes. >> > Lazy 2/3 Majority - Lazy 2/3 majority votes requires at least 3 votes >> > and twice as many +1 votes as -1 votes. >> > Vetoes >> > A valid, binding veto cannot be overruled. If a veto is cast, it must >> > be accompanied by a valid reason explaining the reasons for the veto. >> > The validity of a veto, if challenged, can be confirmed by anyone who >> > has a binding vote. This does not necessarily signify agreement with >> > the veto - merely that the veto is valid. >> > >> > If you disagree with a valid veto, you must lobby the person casting >> > the veto to withdraw their veto. If a veto is not withdrawn, any >> > action that has been vetoed must be reversed in a timely manner. >> > >> > Actions >> > 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. >> > >> > Code Change >> > A change made to a codebase of the project and committed by a >> > committer. This includes source code, documentation, website content, >> > etc. >> > >> > At least one +2 from a committer and no -1 from any committer. >> > >> > Product Release >> > When a release of one of the project's products is ready, a vote is >> > required to accept the release as an official release of the project. >> > >> > Lazy Majority of active PMC members >> > >> > New Branch Committer >> > When a branch committer is proposed for the PMC >> > >> > Lazy consensus of active PMC members >> > >> > New Committer >> > When a new committer is proposed for the project >> > >> > Consensus approval of active PMC members >> > >> > New PMC Member >> > When a committer is proposed for the PMC >> > >> > Consensus approval of active PMC members >> > >> > Branch Committer Removal >> > When removal of commit privileges is sought or when the branch is >> > merged to the mainline >> > >> > Lazy 2/3 majority of active PMC members >> > >> > Committer Removal >> > When removal of commit privileges is sought. Note: Such actions will >> > also be referred to the ASF board by the PMC chair >> > >> > Lazy 2/3 majority of active PMC members (excluding the committer in >> > question if a member of the PMC). >> > >> > PMC Member Removal >> > When removal of a PMC member is sought. Note: Such actions will also >> > be referred to the ASF board by the PMC chair. >> > >> > Lazy 2/3 majority of active PMC members (excluding the member in >> question) >> > >> > Modifying Bylaws >> > Modifying this document. >> > >> > Lazy majority of active PMC members >> > >> > Voting Timeframes >> > Votes are open for a period of 72 hours to allow all active voters >> > time to consider the vote. Votes relating to code changes are not >> > subject to a strict timetable but should be made as timely as >> > possible. >>
