Retry (after discussing the mail/hermes problem in infra). rgds jan I.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: jan i <j...@apache.org> Date: 16 December 2013 01:10 Subject: Re: 72 hours rule. To: labs@labs.apache.org Sorry for top posting. I continue this thread on labs alone, since it only concerns labs. I have, as suggested, studied: - the original charter - the mail threads - the foundation glossary And it clear that labs is caught up in a definition change of lazy consensus. It is my deep belief that we should not only allow but also motivate all committers to experiment (I am old enough to remember how bbs developers laughed, when the first rumors of httpd hit the boards). Committers freedom to experiment is part of our common future, lets put as few restrictions on that as possible. As a side note, I received a private email in response suggesting a.o. I could always use gitHub, I hope it was a joke because we dont push motivated committers away. I will therefore in a separate mail to private request a vote to remedy this impossible situation. I have followed labs ML for a while, and I feel we can easily do a bit more to attract new ideas. Being a infra person I had a look at the labs setup, its really not much more than the url. The "browse labs" seems outdated (some of the project does not have svn entries anymore). We should also give the labs a possibility to test their sw, by having a common labs vm with httpd. In case the PMCs find my view correct I volunteer to do something about the homepage, and other items as we go along (e.g. setting up and maintaining a vm). rgds jan I. On 15 December 2013 21:31, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > The foundation glossary is here > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html > > > On 15 December 2013 20:29, Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Like most things around here, it's best to ask in the specific > > community where you find the confusion. In the case of Labs, it's a > > known issue[1]. If you want to help us (labs) improve the situation, > > that'd be great. There's history in our mail archives. > > > > Thanks, > > --tim > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LABS-512 > > > > On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:21 AM, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi. > >> > >> I am not sure if this is the right place for such a > question/suggestion, but > >> better here than nowhere :-) > >> > >> I have lately been meet with confusion in 2 situations, both at ASF > >> community level (at least if you look from a distance). > >> > >> Lazy consensus defines "silence is consensus", but projects (like e.g. > labs) > >> tends to redefine this rule: > >> > >> "Every ASF committer can ask for one or more labs. The creation of the > lab > >> requires a PMC lazy consensus vote (at least three +1 and no -1, 72 > hours)" > >> > >> In my mind this sentence is hard to understand, does it mean: > >> a) PMC who dont send an explicit +1/-1 cast a +1 == "silence is > concensus" > >> or > >> b) 3 +1 pmc votes is needed, so the rules of "lazy consensus" does not > >> apply > >> > >> The people who wrote the lines I quote are all much more experienced in > "the > >> apache way" than I am, but I believe its important that newcomers (like > >> myself) can read and understand what is written, without having to read > >> "between the lines". > >> > >> I suggest, that we make an effort to at least at ASF community level, > not to > >> confuse, but to be precise. I believe it would be correct to append [1] > >> with: > >> > >> "Lazy consensus cannot be used, if the project requires a minimum > number of > >> +1 for the proposal to be accepted" > >> > >> @labs, please dont feel targeted, I am not picking on your project > (which I > >> happen to believe is VERY important, and much too unknown"), but > allowing > >> myself to use your good website as documentation for my point. > >> > >> rgds > >> jan I. > >> > >> > >> [1] http://community.apache.org/committers/lazyConsensus.html > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscr...@labs.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: labs-h...@labs.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscr...@labs.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: labs-h...@labs.apache.org > >
