[sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Dr. Chuck Dr. Chuck
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

Time to switch the majority of the decision to the CLE RELEASE TEAM and do a 24 or at most 48 hour lazy consensus vote on releases once CLE RELEASE TEAM is thumbs up.

/Chuck

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
Noah Botimer Noah Botimer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

+1

Thanks,
-Noah

On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Charles Severance wrote:

> Time to switch the majority of the decision to the CLE RELEASE TEAM and do a 24 or at most 48 hour lazy consensus vote on releases once CLE RELEASE TEAM is thumbs up.
>
> /Chuck
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
Berg, Alan Berg, Alan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

If this is a vote +1.

Noah Botimer <[hidden email]> wrote:


+1

Thanks,
-Noah

On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Charles Severance wrote:

> Time to switch the majority of the decision to the CLE RELEASE TEAM and do a 24 or at most 48 hour lazy consensus vote on releases once CLE RELEASE TEAM is thumbs up.
>
> /Chuck
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
Steve Swinsburg-3 Steve Swinsburg-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

I support 48 hours due to time zone spread and so due consideration remains. 5 days is too long for sure.
+1

Sent from my iPhone

On 23/08/2013, at 7:49, "Berg, Alan" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> If this is a vote +1.
>
> Noah Botimer <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> +1
>
> Thanks,
> -Noah
>
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Charles Severance wrote:
>
>> Time to switch the majority of the decision to the CLE RELEASE TEAM and do a 24 or at most 48 hour lazy consensus vote on releases once CLE RELEASE TEAM is thumbs up.
>>
>> /Chuck
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sakai2-tcc mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
Anthony Whyte Anthony Whyte
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

The subject line of this thread misstates the rules regarding voting.  Per section 2.0 when a roll call vote is called by the chair the poll duration is three working days not five as suggested by my right honorable friend csev's subject line [1].  However, depending on when a vote is called it is possible for voting to stretch across five calendar days, since Saturday and Sunday are not considered working days according to the rules (a pleasant fiction for many of us).  

I'll draft a proposal in the morning (apologies for letting it slip a few days after raising it last week but on reconsideration I thought calling for a vote while Matt was working on getting 2.9.3 out the door unnecessarily distracting).  

I plan to propose the following:

1.  Proposals declaring an intention to perform a community release commencing on a given date will operate under the "lazy consensus" model for gauging consensus through silence.
2.  Release proposals will be communicated via the sakai-dev mailing list.  Other lists may be carbon copied but sakai-dev is the designated channel for release proposal communications.
3.  While any contributor associated with release work is free to offer a release proposal it is recommended that community-acknowledged release leads/managers submit the proposal to sakai-dev.
4.  Release proposals will provide an explicit date when the release work will commence and provide a 48-hour time window--measured in calendar time, not "working day" time--for TCC members and committers to raise a material objection before consent can be assumed, i.e.:

[X intends to release Y commencing on date Z unless a valid objection is raised by Z - 48 hours]
 
5.  A material objection must include an explanation describing why the proposal should be rejected.  Non-security objections must be communicated via the sakai-dev list; security concerns must not be raised on any public list but instead be forwarded directly to the Sakai Security WG for review.  Objections without an accompanying explanation or raised on lists other than sakai-dev (security issues excepted) will be ignored.  
6.  If a valid objection is sustained community members working on the release must roll back any work associated with the objection. 
7.  Community members are free to indicate support for the proposal with a reply of +1; however, recall that under lazy consensus such votes (and associated email traffic) while encouraging to the authors of the proposal are actually superfluous since silence equals consent. 

Cheers,

Anthony




anthony whyte | its and mlibrary | university of michigan | [hidden email] | 517-980-0228


On Aug 22, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Steve Swinsburg wrote:

I support 48 hours due to time zone spread and so due consideration remains. 5 days is too long for sure.
+1

Sent from my iPhone

On 23/08/2013, at 7:49, "Berg, Alan" <[hidden email]> wrote:

If this is a vote +1.

Noah Botimer <[hidden email]> wrote:


+1

Thanks,
-Noah

On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Charles Severance wrote:

Time to switch the majority of the decision to the CLE RELEASE TEAM and do a 24 or at most 48 hour lazy consensus vote on releases once CLE RELEASE TEAM is thumbs up.

/Chuck

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc


_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
Dr. Chuck Dr. Chuck
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

I was not calling for a vote per se :)

I was just saying, lets not waste time and dispatch quickly with this issue.   

Anthony of course is much better with precise punctuation than me as amply evidenced below... :)

I like his words BTW.  Section 3. seems like it was written by lawyers.  So you mean people like the CLE-Release-tem without explicitly naming folks?   Better wording would say something like the proposal is expected to come from those who are working closely with the release process and best informed as to the starus of the release or some such.  That way we mean the CLE RELEASE TEAM without making it so formal.

/Chuck

On Aug 22, 2013, at 11:08 PM, Anthony Whyte <[hidden email]> wrote:

The subject line of this thread misstates the rules regarding voting.  Per section 2.0 when a roll call vote is called by the chair the poll duration is three working days not five as suggested by my right honorable friend csev's subject line [1].  However, depending on when a vote is called it is possible for voting to stretch across five calendar days, since Saturday and Sunday are not considered working days according to the rules (a pleasant fiction for many of us).  

I'll draft a proposal in the morning (apologies for letting it slip a few days after raising it last week but on reconsideration I thought calling for a vote while Matt was working on getting 2.9.3 out the door unnecessarily distracting).  

I plan to propose the following:

1.  Proposals declaring an intention to perform a community release commencing on a given date will operate under the "lazy consensus" model for gauging consensus through silence.
2.  Release proposals will be communicated via the sakai-dev mailing list.  Other lists may be carbon copied but sakai-dev is the designated channel for release proposal communications.
3.  While any contributor associated with release work is free to offer a release proposal it is recommended that community-acknowledged release leads/managers submit the proposal to sakai-dev.
4.  Release proposals will provide an explicit date when the release work will commence and provide a 48-hour time window--measured in calendar time, not "working day" time--for TCC members and committers to raise a material objection before consent can be assumed, i.e.:

[X intends to release Y commencing on date Z unless a valid objection is raised by Z - 48 hours]
 
5.  A material objection must include an explanation describing why the proposal should be rejected.  Non-security objections must be communicated via the sakai-dev list; security concerns must not be raised on any public list but instead be forwarded directly to the Sakai Security WG for review.  Objections without an accompanying explanation or raised on lists other than sakai-dev (security issues excepted) will be ignored.  
6.  If a valid objection is sustained community members working on the release must roll back any work associated with the objection. 
7.  Community members are free to indicate support for the proposal with a reply of +1; however, recall that under lazy consensus such votes (and associated email traffic) while encouraging to the authors of the proposal are actually superfluous since silence equals consent. 

Cheers,

Anthony




anthony whyte | its and mlibrary | university of michigan | [hidden email] | 517-980-0228


On Aug 22, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Steve Swinsburg wrote:

I support 48 hours due to time zone spread and so due consideration remains. 5 days is too long for sure.
+1

Sent from my iPhone

On 23/08/2013, at 7:49, "Berg, Alan" <[hidden email]> wrote:

If this is a vote +1.

Noah Botimer <[hidden email]> wrote:


+1

Thanks,
-Noah

On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Charles Severance wrote:

Time to switch the majority of the decision to the CLE RELEASE TEAM and do a 24 or at most 48 hour lazy consensus vote on releases once CLE RELEASE TEAM is thumbs up.

/Chuck

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc



_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
Anthony Whyte Anthony Whyte
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [sakai2-tcc] Eliminating the 5 day roll call vote by the TCC for a release

Better wording would say something like the proposal is expected to come from those who are working closely with the release process and best informed as to the starus of the release or some such.  That way we mean the CLE RELEASE TEAM without making it so formal.

Exactly my intention but better worded by you.  :)

Anth

anthony whyte | its and mlibrary | university of michigan | [hidden email] | 517-980-0228


On Aug 22, 2013, at 11:46 PM, Charles Severance wrote:

I was not calling for a vote per se :)

I was just saying, lets not waste time and dispatch quickly with this issue.   

Anthony of course is much better with precise punctuation than me as amply evidenced below... :)

I like his words BTW.  Section 3. seems like it was written by lawyers.  So you mean people like the CLE-Release-tem without explicitly naming folks?   Better wording would say something like the proposal is expected to come from those who are working closely with the release process and best informed as to the starus of the release or some such.  That way we mean the CLE RELEASE TEAM without making it so formal.

/Chuck

On Aug 22, 2013, at 11:08 PM, Anthony Whyte <[hidden email]> wrote:

The subject line of this thread misstates the rules regarding voting.  Per section 2.0 when a roll call vote is called by the chair the poll duration is three working days not five as suggested by my right honorable friend csev's subject line [1].  However, depending on when a vote is called it is possible for voting to stretch across five calendar days, since Saturday and Sunday are not considered working days according to the rules (a pleasant fiction for many of us).  

I'll draft a proposal in the morning (apologies for letting it slip a few days after raising it last week but on reconsideration I thought calling for a vote while Matt was working on getting 2.9.3 out the door unnecessarily distracting).  

I plan to propose the following:

1.  Proposals declaring an intention to perform a community release commencing on a given date will operate under the "lazy consensus" model for gauging consensus through silence.
2.  Release proposals will be communicated via the sakai-dev mailing list.  Other lists may be carbon copied but sakai-dev is the designated channel for release proposal communications.
3.  While any contributor associated with release work is free to offer a release proposal it is recommended that community-acknowledged release leads/managers submit the proposal to sakai-dev.
4.  Release proposals will provide an explicit date when the release work will commence and provide a 48-hour time window--measured in calendar time, not "working day" time--for TCC members and committers to raise a material objection before consent can be assumed, i.e.:

[X intends to release Y commencing on date Z unless a valid objection is raised by Z - 48 hours]
 
5.  A material objection must include an explanation describing why the proposal should be rejected.  Non-security objections must be communicated via the sakai-dev list; security concerns must not be raised on any public list but instead be forwarded directly to the Sakai Security WG for review.  Objections without an accompanying explanation or raised on lists other than sakai-dev (security issues excepted) will be ignored.  
6.  If a valid objection is sustained community members working on the release must roll back any work associated with the objection. 
7.  Community members are free to indicate support for the proposal with a reply of +1; however, recall that under lazy consensus such votes (and associated email traffic) while encouraging to the authors of the proposal are actually superfluous since silence equals consent. 

Cheers,

Anthony




anthony whyte | its and mlibrary | university of michigan | [hidden email] | 517-980-0228


On Aug 22, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Steve Swinsburg wrote:

I support 48 hours due to time zone spread and so due consideration remains. 5 days is too long for sure.
+1

Sent from my iPhone

On 23/08/2013, at 7:49, "Berg, Alan" <[hidden email]> wrote:

If this is a vote +1.

Noah Botimer <[hidden email]> wrote:


+1

Thanks,
-Noah

On Aug 22, 2013, at 5:22 PM, Charles Severance wrote:

Time to switch the majority of the decision to the CLE RELEASE TEAM and do a 24 or at most 48 hour lazy consensus vote on releases once CLE RELEASE TEAM is thumbs up.

/Chuck

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc

_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc




_______________________________________________
sakai2-tcc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc