Re: [VOTE] Apache Cassandra Release Lifecycle

Sure..lets do that. On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 3:21 PM Benedict Elliott Smith wrote: > Perhaps we should move the proposed document to the cwiki for purposes of > voting? That way it's in a place owned by the project, with a permanent > history. Otherwise it's not entirely clear what was voted

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cassandra Release Lifecycle

Perhaps we should move the proposed document to the cwiki for purposes of voting? That way it's in a place owned by the project, with a permanent history. Otherwise it's not entirely clear what was voted on. On 30/09/2019, 20:10, "Sumanth Pasupuleti" wrote: +1 On Mon, Sep

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cassandra Release Lifecycle

Vote will be open for 72 hours. On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:09 PM Sumanth Pasupuleti < sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:00 PM Nate McCall wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:52 AM sankalp kohli > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > We have

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

> > These are all further reasons to codify our project governance, as we keep > referring to things that don't map to project norms. Strong +1 here. To reiterate: I don't necessarily agree w/all the stated defaults for project management and behavior, we just haven't really articulated our own

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

Hmm, you're right, I'm not sure what I was remembering. Fortunately you can just ignore the first sentence of my email; mea culpa. However, I'm not sure how useful it is as a mechanism for achieving consensus if there's no way for voting members to know a decision is being made. The value of

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cassandra Release Lifecycle

+1 On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:00 PM Nate McCall wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:52 AM sankalp kohli > wrote: > > > Hi, > > We have discussed in the email thread[1] about Apache Cassandra > Release > > Lifecycle. We came up with a doc[2] for it. Please vote on it if you > agree > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cassandra Release Lifecycle

+1 On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 7:52 AM sankalp kohli wrote: > Hi, > We have discussed in the email thread[1] about Apache Cassandra Release > Lifecycle. We came up with a doc[2] for it. Please vote on it if you agree > with the content of the doc[2]. > > Thanks, > Sankalp > > [1] > >

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

I will still start a vote and not solely rely on lazy consensus. On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:06 AM Joshua McKenzie wrote: > I believe your statement is inaccurate, or perhaps just overly broad: " > Lazy consensus still requires a formal vote, just one that is declared to > be governed by lazy

[VOTE] Apache Cassandra Release Lifecycle

Hi, We have discussed in the email thread[1] about Apache Cassandra Release Lifecycle. We came up with a doc[2] for it. Please vote on it if you agree with the content of the doc[2]. Thanks, Sankalp [1]

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

I believe your statement is inaccurate, or perhaps just overly broad: " Lazy consensus still requires a formal vote, just one that is declared to be governed by lazy consensus"; the article I linked explicitly states: "You don't have to insist people discuss and/or approve your plan, *and you

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

Lazy consensus still requires a formal vote, just one that is declared to be governed by lazy consensus. I think we need to spend some time formalising our governance, so that we can employ it confidently. At the very least, we should try to codify where we are comfortable employing lazy

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

For what it's worth, lazy consensus is a very important concept in the Apache Way . Methinks if we got a little more comfortable w/lazy consensus and majority voting on process we might see