drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Drill bylaws
Date Wed, 08 Oct 2014 22:09:29 GMT
On Oct 8, 2014, at 2:29 PM, Tomer Shiran <tshiran@gmail.com> wrote:

Given Drill's
focus on providing a great user experience, I think that having stronger
controls in place makes sense.

I don’t agree with your rationale. You are assuming that in a crisis the
majority wants a “great user experience” and the minority wants… what… a
worse user experience? It could just as easily be the reverse.

That said, I do agree with your conclusion.

I suggest to strike the text

>  , unless the code change represents a merge from a branch, in which case
three +1s are required.

It may be appropriate for Hadoop, which uses svn, but is not appropriate
for Drill, which uses git, and therefore every commit is arguably a merge
from a branch. For non-trivial code changes, we don’t need language in the
bylaws: the committer would be wise to build consensus in advance, or face
having his/her change backed out.


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message