Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

Geez, dude. Ease up. "all of us" only meant the four of us voting -1. On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: > What? Is this now an implicit ASF incubation policy? So, if I understand > you correctly, you want to exclude potentials from the incubation

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > >... > > > As far as I can tell from the proposals and DISCUSS, RTC was the process > > already present in the community proposed. If the -1 folks

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

Greg Stein wrote: RTC versus CTR is clearly a religious debate. There are a large number of > successful and vibrant Apache communities using each paradigm. I don't > "Apache communities" is (IMO) a very important point here. I believe that Apache communities understand the nuances of peer

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

What? Is this now an implicit ASF incubation policy? So, if I understand you correctly, you want to exclude potentials from the incubation process based on this? And you don't want this potential have their own way of working? Even though 18 peers voted +1 for having this potential entering the

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:53 AM, Jacques Nadeau wrote: > ...If the process is 3x+1 and more +1 than -1, this vote passes as Henry > stated... It does pass indeed. >From a community point of view however, -1s need to be taken into account and translated into some statement or

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

FWIW, I see the fact that there were some -1s in the vote as a positive thing in ensuring that the concerns behind the -1s will be addressed. I mean that the community will feel a pressure to be inclusive to “prove” that RTC is not an impediment to community growth. It stands to reason that

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > > ... > > Binding -1s (4): > > Greg Stein > > Ralph Goers > > Roman Shaposhnik > > Konstantin Boudnik ... > > Please

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

Thanks Owen (and apologies for missing your vote: I swore I saw it at the time, then checked the thread twice and somehow missed it). The updated results are below: Binding +1s (18): Todd Lipcon Arvind Prabhakar Chris Mattmann Julien Le Dem Carl Steinbach Brock Noland

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > ... > Binding -1s (4): > Greg Stein > Ralph Goers > Roman Shaposhnik > Konstantin Boudnik ... Please indicate how the issues that are behind these -1s have been addressed. I might have missed something,

[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

This vote is now closed and passes with 17 binding +1 votes, 7 non-binding +1 votes and 4 binding -1 votes. Thanks to everyone that voted! Here is my tally of the votes: Binding +1s (17): Todd Lipcon Arvind Prabhakar Chris Mattmann Julien Le Dem Carl Steinbach Brock

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

Not that it changes the result, but I also voted +1. https://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg52096.html .. Owen On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > This vote is now closed and passes with 17 binding +1 votes, 7 non-binding > +1 votes

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > On 12/01/2015 11:37 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > > On 1 December 2015 at 14:32, Bertrand Delacretaz > > > wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson >

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: > Greg, > > May I suggest a compromise? Enter incubation with no explicit commit > policy and let the community choose a commit policy if and when they see > fit. > The community already discussed it and made a choice. They'll

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: >... > On 1 December 2015 at 14:46, Daniel Gruno wrote: > >... > > Given as we have no actual incubator policy that states whether > > consensus is required or not - or at least none that I could

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: >... > As far as I can tell from the proposals and DISCUSS, RTC was the process > already present in the community proposed. If the -1 folks would like to > convince the community to change its approach then they should take

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On 1 December 2015 at 14:32, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > > ... > > Binding -1s (4): > > Greg Stein > > Ralph Goers > > Roman Shaposhnik > > Konstantin Boudnik ... > > Please

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

Greg, May I suggest a compromise? Enter incubation with no explicit commit policy and let the community choose a commit policy if and when they see fit. Julian > On Dec 1, 2015, at 2:35 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On 1 December 2015 at 14:46, Daniel Gruno wrote: > On 12/01/2015 11:37 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > > On 1 December 2015 at 14:32, Bertrand Delacretaz > > > wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson > wrote:

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On 1 December 2015 at 15:22, Greg Stein wrote: > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > >... > > > On 1 December 2015 at 14:46, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > > >... > > > > Given as we have no actual incubator policy that

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On 12/01/2015 11:37 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > On 1 December 2015 at 14:32, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: >>> ... >>> Binding -1s (4): >>> Greg Stein >>> Ralph Goers >>> Roman

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

The only mention of consensus I could find is in the actual development of the actual proposal. I’m sure one could argue that that implies that whether consensus is achieved is by the vote, but with a group as large as the IPMC it would be horrible to allow a single vote to block a podling from

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

A few thoughts from a 'bystander': It's great that Greg and the others who disagree cast their dissenting votes. That doesn't mean that we should throw out process. If the process is 3x+1 and more +1 than -1, this vote passes as Henry stated. Greg even stated (if I understand his statements

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > The only mention of consensus I could find is in the actual development of > the actual > proposal. I’m sure one could argue that that implies that whether consensus > is achieved > is by the vote, but with a group

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Jacques Nadeau wrote: >... > It's great that Greg and the others who disagree cast their dissenting > votes. That doesn't mean that we should throw out process. If the process > is 3x+1 and more +1 than -1, this vote passes as Henry stated.