No feedback = No concerns.
So this matter can be laid to rest
Lars
On 16/05/2014 13:38, Lars Kurth wrote:
On 15/05/2014 10:19, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
On 15 May 2014, at 09:57, Lars Kurth <lars.ku...@xen.org> wrote:
All the existing committers have voted in favour. So the proposal
carries. I will update the XAPI webpage
http://www.xenproject.org/developers/teams/xapi.html accordingly
Lars
This isn't intended to affect the voting, but I would note that it's
slightly odd for an open-source project to switch its committers in
such a big sweep without at least some discussion about how this
affects the overall project direction.
Actually, thinking about it *could* affect the direction of the
project for anything that is related to global votes. And we *do* need
to have a discussion about it. And we *may* need a process change or
clarification, but I don't think so as the process was originally
designed to cover a gradual increase in the number of subprojects.
Thanks Anil for pointing this out. I was too overloaded to really spot
this : Apologies.
== Different Expectations when to award maintainer status ==
First there is the observation in that:
* There are significant differences when it comes to when (aka under
which criteria) committer status is awarded between subprojects and
there are also difference in view within subprojects
* XAPI does not have the maintainer role as far as I understand. In
other words in XAPI maintainer=committer. Please correct me if I am
wrong.
== Process implications ==
Looking at the governance process:
http://www.xenproject.org/governance.html
Maintainers and committers have the right to vote in some
circumstances. Now we have local (within subproject) and global votes
(affecting all projects). What the process states specifically when it
comes to voting is:
* The role of committers in electing other committers and project
leads - this is subproject local. As such, a significant change in the
number of committers only has a local effect.
* The role of maintainers (but not committers) is mentioned
specifically when it comes to "formal votes" such as changes to
governance (global) and other local votes. No mention of committers.
In other words, all maintainers vote in "formal votes".
* Looking at the voting related to the project lify cycle: These are
just "formal votes" which are allowed by maintainers
* Committers are specifically mentioned as "referees" in case there
are conflicts. There we have a hierarchy of conflict resolution and
the proposed xhange to XAPI committers should not affect
== What is the impact of this change (IMPORTANT) ==
As such, the change proposed to XAPI committers is affecting the
voting dynamics for global votes as on the face of it it increases the
number of maintainers (=committers) from 5 to 13. Given the size of
XAPI subproject and the fact that it basically never listed its
maintainers this seems reasonable. Also in light of the number of
maintainers in the Hypervisor project, of which there are 28 if I
counted correctly.
But it does raise the question as to whether such a significant change
to maintainers sets a bad precedence and whether we need to look at
our process
So I would argue that, *this ptoposal has* a global impact - even
though unintended - and that for this reason we need to have a
discussion and maybe a formal vote to ratify this proposed change by
the XAPI project.
Best Regards
Lars
_______________________________________________
Xen-api mailing list
Xen-api@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
