Hi everyone, Thanks for all the comments and feedback on the document, I am working with a few commenters on some additional changes and wording, and then will carry out the vote.
Best, Jack Ye On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 11:02 AM Jack Ye <yezhao...@gmail.com> wrote: > To provide an update here, I have consolidated most of the comments in the > initial version, with the following changes: > > (1) condensed the section of roles and responsibilities, with pointers to > different pages in ASF and existing Iceberg project pages. > > (2) clarified voting details, regrading things like partial votes, > difference of voting on mailing lists vs voting on GitHub PRs > > (3) clarified the section regarding lazy consensus. There is a definition > difference between the ASF definition (no +1 vote needed) vs the ORC > definition (1 +1 vote). I renamed the ORC version as "minimum consensus" > instead. > > (4) updated "Modify Code" vote type to minimum consensus. This is a bit > different from ASF definition for code modification, but I think we are > coming to an agreement that the ASF definition is outdated. Minimum > consensus seems to make the most sense given the way we operate Iceberg so > far, which is basically at least 1 committer other than the author needs to > approve a PR before merging. > > (5) updated all decisions regarding committers and PMC members and > guideline updates to majority approval, following the ASF guideline on > voting for procedural issues. > > Let me know if there is anything else we see major disagreements with, and > I will organize a vote after 24 hours. > > Best, > Jack Ye > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:04 AM Jack Ye <yezhao...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 for adding to the site. >> >> I am putting it as a doc for now since Google doc is easier to comment (I >> think?). My plan is to: >> >> (1) publish it as a PR after a vote has passed. We can do one more sanity >> check in the PR, but the information will be exactly as it is presented in >> the Google doc, maybe adding some additional links to more easily jump >> among the sections or to other pages in the site, fix some grammar issues >> that were overlooked. >> >> (2) keep a changelog within the document itself. Because we have moved >> the site multiple times in the past, I am not really confident that we >> could just track history with Git commit history, especially with such an >> important document. I would like to add a changelog section in the end, >> documenting what change has been approved when, with links to devlist >> discussions and votes. >> >> For how we tackle the other topics, my plan is to pass the initial >> version first, and then we just go through all the identified topics one by >> one. I have a list of all topics in the original feedback collection >> devlist thread. >> >> Let me know what you think about these plans! >> >> Best, >> Jack Ye >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 9:04 AM Ryan Blue <b...@databricks.com.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 for adding this to the site once we agree on the changes. >>> >>> One thing that has been raised several times but hasn't yet been >>> addressed is how we want to tackle this. Many of us have asked to review >>> the additional bylaws individually and discuss the purpose and merits of >>> each one. It's great to have an overall doc (much like our integrated PRs >>> to give context) but I think we should start having separate discussions >>> about the rationale for each bylaw to make progress. >>> >>> Ryan >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:57 AM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jack, >>>> I think it would make sense to convert this to a PR, so it can be >>>> version tracked in the future (and that way it avoids another review if the >>>> intent is to transitition github)? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Micah >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 9:07 AM Jack Ye <yezhao...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the feedback in the bylaws document discussion thread! As >>>>> suggested, I have removed all the topics that require further debates, and >>>>> created this new doc to serve as the initial version that we can review >>>>> and >>>>> later vote. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S3igb5NqSlYE3dq_qRsP3X2gwhe54fx-Sxq5hqyOe6I/edit >>>>> >>>>> I will organize new devlist threads to discuss other topics to amend >>>>> the guidelines step by step, once this initial version is in. >>>>> >>>>> A few additional changes that I have already incorporated: >>>>> 1. modified the name from "bylaws" to "community guidelines", >>>>> following the latest ASF guideline >>>>> 2. renamed "lazy majority" and "lazy 2/3 majority" to "majority >>>>> approval" and "2/3 majority approval" >>>>> 3. changed "Propose Removing Committer", "Propose Removing PMC Member" >>>>> to consensus approval, and added "Propose PMC Chair Change" decision >>>>> following the default Apache project community guidelines. >>>>> 4. changed "Release Product" voting period to 5 days instead of 3 days >>>>> excluding weekends. >>>>> 5. clarified the copyright of code in Apache Iceberg codebases >>>>> >>>>> The most important thing is probably to agree upon the 2/3 majority >>>>> approval for modifying the project guidelines, so we can have a consistent >>>>> voting method going forward. This initial introduction of the bylaws will >>>>> be voted using consensus approval. >>>>> >>>>> Please take a look and comment about any additional changes needed, >>>>> and I will host a vote in 3 days. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Jack Ye >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ryan Blue >>> Databricks >>> >>
