Lazy Majority seems fine to me. Do we really want to allow a single dissenting vote to hold up needed changes?
It's possible at some point there me be a split in the community over the direction that Drill should take, and requiring consensus could result in the project coming to a stand still. On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]> wrote: > I just got back after vacation so haven't had a chance to get caught up on > email. > > What was the thinking of using Lazy approval > Lazy Majority versus using > Lazy Approval > Lazy Consensus for code changes? > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Tomer Shiran <[email protected]> wrote: > > > In order for Drill to graduate to a TLP, we need to finalize the > project's > > bylaws. Here's the latest proposal that has been shared/discussed on this > > list: > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/DRILL/Proposed+Bylaws > > > > The vote will be open for 72 hours. It will close on Oct 9, 4pm PT. > > > > [ ] +1 > > [ ] +0 > > [ ] -1 > > > > Please indicate whether your vote is binding or non-binding. > > > > Thanks, > > Tomer > > > -- Steven Phillips Software Engineer mapr.com
