I added a summary, please correct as needed, since I should button the report up tomorrow.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris, > > The obvious compromise is to ask them to report the vote result as it > happened, it seems to me, -1's and all. But where do you think that > they are reporting anything? There's nothing happening here at the > board level. There's no board resolution needed for a Hive committer > to type 'svn cp' on the hcatalog tree, nor for the Hive PMC to set up > some worrisome umbrellaesque structure of internal bylaws. When the > Hive PMC reports this after the fact, the board might response. > > Having written all this, please feel free to add whatever version of > this you would like to the general remarks of the February report wiki > page, where I will leave it unscathed. > > --benson > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) > <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: >> Classifying this as a procedural vote gives the easy out of majority rule. >> >> It is the IPMC's recommendation to the board that the board then evaluates >> to become a TLP or not. Based on Benson's later email he is shucking all >> of that to the board. Benson, I would hope you consider -1s to be VETO in >> this case, or at the very least, noting that in your report should you >> still bull ahead and recommend it. BTW for everyone's benefit, go look up >> the # of times that people -1 graduations. It's VERY rare, so I hope this >> an indication that there is something seriously up here. I have nothing >> against Hive or HCatalog -- I simply am trying to intimate this will be >> trouble down the road. >> >> In the end, yes, it's the board, but it's on the recommendation of the >> IPMC. It would be pretty lame if the IPMC made the recommendation to >> create HCatalog as a part of Hive per the requested method and they didn't >> mention the 2 objections (mine which I strongly consider a VETO) and Chris >> D.'s -0. >> >> Chris >> >> On 2/12/13 5:14 PM, "Alan Gates" <ga...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >> >>>So I'm not clear what the next step is here. The 72 hours have passed, >>>we have 5 +1 votes, 2 -1 votes, and a -0. >>> >>>Based on this page http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html this >>>appears to be a procedural vote so it just requires a majority. >>> >>>Are we done or is it traditional to allow more time for the vote when the >>>issue is contentious? >>> >>>Alan. >>> >>> >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>>For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
