Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop >> mail # general >> [DISCUSS] change bylaws to add "branch committers"


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [DISCUSS] change bylaws to add "branch committers"
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Luke Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are we going to enforce branch ACLs (mostly to prevent mistakes)?
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Kihwal Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When would a branch committer privilege terminate?

When the branch merges. If we used branch ACLs, that would be a
consequence, but it's a clear policy, either way. If a branch
contributor stays involved they're usually made into full committers,
so we probably don't need to manage ACLs too tightly.

I also agree with Chris and Eli's qualifications. The intent is to
support development of active features, not create a sandbox that will
never merge back.

I'll call a vote starting tomorrow on the following diff to the
bylaws, unless someone has modifications to the phrasing. -C

Index: main/author/src/documentation/
content/xdocs/bylaws.xml
==================================================================--- main/author/src/documentation/content/xdocs/bylaws.xml
(revision 1505876)
+++ main/author/src/documentation/content/xdocs/bylaws.xml      (working copy)
@@ -76,6 +76,13 @@
         commit access from the PMC. Such reinstatement is subject to
         consensus approval of active PMC members.</p>

+        <p>Significant, pervasive features are often developed in a speculative
+        branch of the repository. The PMC may grant commit rights on the
+        branch to its consistent contributors, while the initiative is active.
+        Branch committers are responsible for shepherding their feature into
+        an active release and do not cast binding votes or vetoes in the
+        project.</p>
+
         <p>All Apache committers are required to have a signed Contributor
         License Agreement (CLA) on file with the Apache Software
         Foundation. There is a <a
@@ -220,6 +227,9 @@
              Consensus approval requires 3 binding +1 votes
              and no binding vetoes.</li>

+        <li> <strong>Lazy Consensus -</strong>
+             Lazy consensus requires no -1 votes ('silence gives assent').</li>
+
         <li> <strong>Lazy Majority - </strong>
              A lazy majority vote requires 3 binding +1
              votes and more binding +1 votes than -1 votes.</li>
@@ -279,6 +289,12 @@

             <p>Lazy 2/3 majority of PMC members</p></li>

+         <li> <strong>New Branch Committer</strong>
+
+            <p>When a branch committer is proposed for the PMC</p>
+
+            <p>Lazy consensus of active PMC members</p></li>
+
          <li> <strong>New Committer</strong>

             <p>When a new committer is proposed for the project</p>
@@ -291,6 +307,13 @@

             <p>Consensus approval of active PMC members</p></li>

+         <li> <strong>Branch Committer Removal</strong>
+
+            <p>When removal of commit privileges is sought <strong>or</strong>
+               when the branch is merged to the mainline</p>
+
+            <p>Lazy 2/3 majority of active PMC members</p></li>
+
          <li> <strong>Committer Removal</strong>

             <p>When removal of commit privileges is sought.  Note: Such

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Kihwal Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When would a branch committer privilege terminate?
>
> -Kihwal
>
> On 7/18/13 11:31 AM, "Robert Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>I like the idea too.  My only concern would be the load it would put on
>>INFRA to support this, but I don't see hundreds of new committers showing
>>up so I am +1 on it.
>>
>>--Bobby
>>
>>On 7/17/13 12:43 PM, "Eli Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>+1  sounds reasonable to me.  There's an assumption that we won't
>>>release from feature branches, worth saying that explicitly.
>>>
>>>On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Chris Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>wrote:
>>>> In some projects at the ASF, a PMC member can grant commit rights on a
>>>> feature branch to a contributor with minimal overhead. When developing
>>>> significant or pervasive features, collaboration across linked JIRAs
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB