osdir.com

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [VOTE] Development Approach for Apache Cassandra Management process


The last email on the thread was 3 days ago and I made it clear days back
that we should vote on it to make progress. Without this vote, I am not
sure we will make progress.
Many people want to contribute on this and hence we are voting so we can
make progress.

My vote is d


On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 1:36 PM Jonathan Haddad <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This voting process feels a bit rushed and frankly not well thought out.
> In addition to Sylvain's valid points, which you (Sankalp) didn't address
> at all, the discussion in the other threads seemed to be ongoing.  The last
> email you wrote on one of them was asking for additional feedback, that
> indicates the discussion is still open.
>
> Out of principal I vote for none of the options (inaction).  You're
> deliberately trying to ram *something* through, and that's not how this is
> supposed to work.
>
> For those of you unfamiliar with the process - please read
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html.
>
> I'd like to ask those of you that are +1'ing, are you willing to contribute
> or are you just voting we start an admin tool from scratch because you
> think it'll somehow produce a perfect codebase?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 12:50 PM sankalp kohli <kohlisankalp@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Sylvain,
> >                 I would appreciate if we can give feedback on the
> > discussion threads and not wait for vote threads. I made it clear in the
> > discussion thread that we will start a vote!!
> > Thanks,
> > Sankalp
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 12:47 PM Jeff Jirsa <jjirsa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 12:41 PM Sylvain Lebresne <lebresne@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > That's probably a stupid question, and excuse me if it is, but what
> > does
> > > > those votes on the dev mailing list even mean?
> > > >
> > > > How do you count votes at the end? Just by counting all votes cast,
> > > > irregardless of whomever cast it? Or are we intending to only count
> PMC
> > > > members, or maybe committers votes?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I believe the intent is to try to see if there exists consensus.
> > > Ultimately, PMC is going to matter more than random email addresses
> from
> > > people nobody recognizes. This should be in public, though, not
> private,
> > so
> > > seeing what feedback is beyond the PMC is useful (primarily because it
> > will
> > > matter when it comes time to extend and maintain it - if people
> strongly
> > > prefer one or the other, then maintenance is going to be a problem).
> > >
> > > If there's 100 random non-contributor votes for one option and 20 pmc
> > votes
> > > for another options, I think the real answer will be "we don't have
> > > consensus, and either we don't do it, or we do it the way the PMC
> thinks
> > is
> > > best", for all of the reasons you describe in the paragraphs below.
> > >
> > >
> > > > If the former, that is a bit weird to me because we simply don't know
> > who
> > > > votes. And I don't mean to be rude towards anyone, but 1) someone
> could
> > > > easily create 10 email addresses to vote 10 times (and sure, you
> could
> > > > invoke trust, and I'm not entirely against trust in general, but it's
> > the
> > > > internet...) and 2) this kind of decision will have non-trivial
> > > > consequences for the project, particularly on those that maintain it,
> > so
> > > I
> > > > admit I'm not entirely comfortable with "anyone's voice has the same
> > > > weight".
> > > > If the latter, then this makes more sense to me (why are we even
> > > bothering
> > > > voting PMC members in if it's not to handle these kinds of decisions,
> > > which
> > > > are very "project management" related), but we should be very clear
> > about
> > > > this from the get go (we could still use the dev list for
> transparency
> > > > sake, that I don't mind)? We should probably also have some deadline
> to
> > > the
> > > > vote, one that isn't too short.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Like releases, I think PMC votes count
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, fwiw, my opinion on this vote is not far from the one on the
> > > golang
> > > > driver acceptance vote (for which my remark above also apply btw): no
> > yet
> > > > 100% convinced adding more pieces and scope to the project is what
> the
> > > > project needs just right now, but not strongly opposed if people
> really
> > > > wants this (and this one makes more sense to me than the golang
> driver
> > > > actually). But if I'm to pick between a) and b), I'm leaning b).
> > > >
> > >
> > > FWIW, two of the main reasons I'm in favor is as a way to lower barrier
> > to
> > > entry to both using the software AND contributing to the project, so I
> > > think your points are valid (both on gocql thread and on this note
> > above),
> > > but I think that's also part of why we should be encouraging both.
> > >
> > > - Jeff
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jon Haddad
> http://www.rustyrazorblade.com
> twitter: rustyrazorblade
>