On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 1:02 AM Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Dave, first thank you for your reply. > > > I’m not part of your community, so it is possible I’m misreading this, > but I see some issues from a casual glance. IMO, the two proposals need to > be discussed further and consensus reached before moving forward. Calling > for a vote without discussion, like the second proposal, is not how things > are done in ASF projects. > > It looks like some community problems have been identified, discussed a > lot with no consensus, then complex proposals were created by a couple of > committers, these proposals were not discussed and instead pushed to a > vote. I am not surprised that a number of community members responded with > a -1. > > I think that rather than have an abstract battle on how to vote the > proposers should do some work by adding to this examples repository. If it > accomplishes what the proposers think it will then having it will help > convince the rest of the community, and then the rest of the work can > continue. > > I agree not having an abstract battle, but at the same time I would like to have a clarification on which is the Apache rules for votes like this. Looking at the Apache document on voting, it seem clear to me that -1 is a veto on code changes. Alex Porcelli said that this is not the case, but I can't find an Apache docs saying this. Brian Profitt, one of our mentors, suggested to ask the IPMC mailing list and here I am asking. I can discuss on the specific case, but I would prefer to have first a solid foundation on what are the agreed default Apache rules on these topics and where they are documented. Regards P. > Best, > Dave > > > > > Kind Regards, > > Justin > > > >> On 12 Mar 2025, at 7:48 AM, Paolo Bizzarri <pibi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> this is Paolo Bizzarri. I am part of the Apache Kie project. > >> > >> I am looking for clarifications about the official policy of Apache > >> foundation about code changes and vetoes. > >> > >> As per this document in the Apache web site, a -1 to a proposal for a > code > >> change is a veto - i.e. it "kills the proposals" > >> > >> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#:~:text=Votes%20On%20Code%20Modification,approve%20of%20this%20change.%27 > >> > >> However we got two proposals that are getting pushed through even in > >> presence of -1 > >> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/drojdtvz6xx1zo35ggjm75xdngnfcl21 > >> > >> and > >> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/c09l9xq0d8jz7th6k23gf5svoky06955 > >> > >> I got an answer from Alex Porcelly stating that "-1 are not vetos on > >> proposals" which seems wrong to me. These are code changes and so the > rules > >> for vetoes should apply. > >> > >> Otherwise I could make a proposal like "put all passwords in plain text > in > >> the code" and then pretend that the PR cannot be vetoed because the > >> corresponding proposal has already been approved, so there is consensus. > >> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/r37j54k3fyg5h18d4xdlb43ff9wcq96b > >> > >> Can you clarify and provide an answer that I can forward to the kie > mailing > >> list? > >> > >> I understand that some projects have defined less restricting veto > >> policies, but I understand also that this is a matter of internal rules > - > >> i.e. a way for the community of a project to decide how to work. My > >> understanding is that in the absence of such a decision, the Apache > default > >> rules apply. > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Paolo Bizzarri > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
