Hi Jie, I understand your concern here, but within Apache projects, "organizations" do not have a voice/vote -- people do.
I think should take into strong consideration the overhead any change may have on any adopter/organization and discuss those risks and problems openly, but ideally this decision would be made based upon consensus within the community. If consensus cannot be reached, a vote among committers may be necessary. Dave On Wed, Jun 3, 2015, at 08:52 AM, Jie Yu wrote: > Adam, > > If a vote is called out, how do we decide if it passes or not. Will that > be > the same of voting for a release (i.e., PMC member can veto it)? > > I would imagine that some PMC members might want to express some negative > feedbacks on this, but certainly do not want to veto it. How do we deal > with this situation? > > As already pointed out in the thread, this name change requires large > amount of work on changing the internal config files, monitoring stack > and > a complicated rolling out procedure. > > Because of that, I would like to propose that we also *count votes by > organization* and take that into account. We probably don't want to pass > a > vote if a majority of the organizations do not want it, right? We'll > decide > each organization's +1/-1 by looking at votes from their employees (e.g., > by majority). > > If one does not have an organization associated with, his/her vote will > be > put into a separate pool. If an organization wants to stay anonymous, > just > use a label (but make sure to use the same label if there are multiple > votes from the same organization). > > How does that sound? > > - Jie > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Adam Bordelon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > There has been much discussion about finding a less offensive name than > > "Slave", and many of these thoughts have been captured in > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1478 > > > > I would like to open up the discussion on this topic for one week, and if > > we cannot arrive at a lazy consensus, I will draft a proposal from the > > discussion and call for a VOTE. > > Here are the questions I would like us to answer: > > 1. What should we call the "Mesos Slave" node/host/machine? > > 2. What should we call the "mesos-slave" process (could be the same)? > > 3. Do we need to rename Mesos Master too? > > > > Another topic worth discussing is the deprecation process, but we don't > > necessarily need to decide on that at the same time as deciding the new > > name(s). > > 4. How will we phase in the new name and phase out the old name? > > > > Please voice your thoughts and opinions below. > > > > Thanks! > > -Adam- > > > > P.S. My personal thoughts: > > 1. Mesos Worker [Node] > > 2. Mesos Worker or Agent > > 3. No > > 4. Carefully > >
