Per the discussion thread: http://s.apache.org/XkY
Should HDFS and MapReduce committers lists be combined and all subsequent committers on either of these two projects be granted karma in the other? If the vote passes, current and future committers to MapReduce and HDFS will gain commit rights in both projects. Commit rights to Common are unaffected. Without bylaws, a 2/3 majority for a committer import seems like a reasonable bar, given that adding an individual committer requires consensus. ---- Owen has started a separate voting thread, proposing to define the Common committer list as the union of HDFS and MapReduce committers (vote A), so I tried to write this (vote B) so it would not conflict. As I'm reading it: A passes, B passes: One can become a committer on HDFS or MapReduce. Commit to either implies commit on HDFS, MR, and Common. A passes, B fails: One can become a committer on HDFS or MapReduce. Commit to either implies commit on Common, only. A fails, B passes: One can become a committer on HDFS, MapReduce, or Common. Commit to to HDFS/MR implies converse, but individual appointments to Common continue. A fails, B fails: Committers continue to be appointed individually to HDFS, MapReduce, and Common. In no scheme would commit rights to Common imply commit rights to either HDFS or MapReduce, I guess. -C
