Chris, Thanks for bringing up the Tez discussion. I think that it was a great example of a community responding to questions and criticisms in a very open and evidence based manner.
I was strongly -1 on that proposal originally based on similar grounds to what has been raised in this thread. The community responded and showed me how I was in error. The discussion was civil, but there were strong disagreements that were worked out over time. On my side, I was working enormously hard at the time and subject to jet-lag which made it very hard to respond well. My vote in the ensuing VOTE thread was +1 because of how the community responded. I was convinced that the community was open and welcoming and trying to build. The raw numbers about affiliation weren't the whole story by any stretch. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Chris Douglas <cdoug...@apache.org> wrote: > Daniel- > > This has been discussed recently in graduations for Tez [1], Drill > [2], and other projects whose continued incubation serves no purpose. > They've completed a curriculum that clears their IP and introduces > them to the ASF's infrastructure, procedures, and culture. The project > must be open, and not threatened by the challenges that open > development poses. We encourage transparency by creating a climate for > projects to report honestly about diversity, rather than incentivizing > corruption of that metric. > > As this thread demonstrates, the IPMC cannot do more. -C > > P.S. Please fix your quoting, or delete the tail of the message as you > reply. > > [1] http://s.apache.org/uT4 > [2] http://s.apache.org/m2u > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
