Yes, I like the procedural issues one (that includes lazy consensus) too.
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020, 11:31 Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> wrote: > (and BTW when we vote on this procedure we should follow voting process on > procedural issues (same link - above) > > "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule > unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes than > unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed -- regardless of > the number of votes in each category. (If the number of votes seems too > small to be representative of a community consensus, the issue is typically > not pursued. However, see the description of lazy consensus for a modifying > factor.)" > > J. > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 12:29 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> > wrote: > > > Agree with the proposal in general. > > > > However I think this is about code modification, so we should rather > > follow Votes on code modifications rather than releases: > > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#votes-on-code-modification > > > > That means: > > > > - we sum all votes and positive means "passed" > > - qualified -1 is a veto but it needs strong explanation and good > > reason otherwise veto is invalid > > - there are fractional votes - -0.5 and -.0.9 as well as +0.9 with > > implications described above. > > - minimum 3 '+1' votes are required- without it we should continue to > > discuss and vote (unless we declare lazy-consensus). > > > > J. > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:50 AM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hey all, > >> > >> I feel like we have good guidelines on creating an AIP, however, there > we > >> don't have "clear" guidelines on the following (We might already do, in > >> which case please correct me): > >> > >> > >> 1. How long should the *Vote *on AIP go on? > >> 2. Minimum number of votes required to marked the AIP as "accepted" > >> 3. What happens when the minimum number of votes is not reached > within > >> the deadline we decide for (1)? Should we consider it an implicit > >> "YES" or > >> just wait! Or is it an implicit "not interested in this AIP"? > >> 4. Can someone veto an AIP? > >> > >> > >> We can adopt the *Release Approval* > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval > >> guidelines > >> for AIP too. > >> > >> My Proposed Answer (similar to Apache Release Process): > >> > >> - A *[DISCUSS]* thread is created to discuss the approach and idea. > If > >> there is a general interest in the idea and unless there are security > >> concerns or a veto from a PMC member, this will go to a VOTE. > >> - A *[VOTE]* thread is created that would last for at least 3 days > >> *and *until > >> 3 *+1* *binding votes* are obtained. > >> - Binding Votes: PMC and Committers > >> - Non-binding Votes: Members of the community > >> > >> > >> I am happy to document the process once we finalize it. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Kaxil > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > Jarek Potiuk > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > > > > > > -- > > Jarek Potiuk > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> >
