Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> writes: > Procedurally, the long hiatus is counterproductive.
This reminds me that the substantive discussion of your veto ended with my email from 8 Feb 2023 that had four direct questions to you and was left without an answer: `````` > That's not how design discussions work. A design discussion doesn't go > "state decision; state pros; implement"; it goes "state problem; discuss > potential solutions, pros, cons; decide; implement" (cf. [4, 5, 6]). Well, I think it may not be as simple as it seems to you. Who decided that we should follow the process you're describing? Is there a thread with a consensus on this topic? Or do you insist on using this specific process because it's the only process that seems obvious to you? What alternatives to it have been considered? As far as I can tell, the process you're suggesting is effectively a waterfall-like process, and there are quite a lot of concerns about its effectiveness, because the decisions have to be made in the conditions of a lack of information. `````` It's been more than 11 months since that email, and those questions still don't have an answer. So if we are to resume this discussion, let's do it from the proper point. > You guys are welcome to try to /convince/ me to change my opinion, or to > have the veto invalidated. In either case, you will be more likely to > succeed should your arguments relate not only to the veto's implications > but also to its /sine qua non/ component: its rationale. Just in case, my personal opinion here is that the veto is invalid. Firstly, based on my understanding, the ASF rules prohibit casting a veto without an appropriate technical justification (see [1], which I personally agree with). Secondly, it seems that the process you are imposing hasn't been accepted in this community. As far as I know, this topic was tangentially discussed before (see [2], for example), and it looks like there hasn't been a consensus to change our current Commit-Then-Review process into some sort of Review-Then-Commit. (At the same time I won't even try to /convince/ you, sorry.) [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/ow2x68g2k4lv2ycr81d14p8r8w2jj1xl Regards, Evgeny Kotkov
