Thanks to everyone who voted. 72 hours has elapsed; this vote has passed.
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Ippokratis Pandis <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Bharath Vissapragada < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 5:41 AM, Michael Ho <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > +1 (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. >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Thanks, >> > Michael >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> Bharath >> > > > > -- > -Ippokratis.
