On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 9:27 AM Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> wrote: > > I believe 48 hours vote is only for PIP, which was agreed in the dev@. > > I would like to understand why Matteo chose 48 hours for this process. What’s > the hurry?
Since we went from no formal process to "some" process, and since any change to public APIs and tools is subject to PIP process, the concern was to not impose a too long delay in getting smaller changes approved and merged. >From the original text: | It is not a goal for PIP to add undue process or slow-down the development. > (Also, I’m not sure what is meant by "Lazy Voting” I don’t find that defined > in ASF documentation.) Where is the term "lazy voting" coming from? I did use "lazy majority" which is the term that indicates that you only need a majority among the PMC votes, not across all the PMC members (most of which will not vote on all the PIPs). | 4. Once some consensus is reached, there will be a vote to formally approve the proposal. The vote will be held on the dev@pulsar.apache.org mailing list. Everyone is welcome to vote on the proposal, though it will considered to be binding only the vote of PMC members. I would be required to have a lazy majority of at least 3 binding +1s votes. The vote should stay open for at least 48 hours. -- Matteo Merli <matteo.me...@gmail.com>
