+1 (PMC) from me too!
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 8:47 AM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry I missed the first vote I think; also +1(pmc) from me. I'd be OK
> with some issues (esp. closed ones) being orphaned in the old system
> too.
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 9:20 AM Dawid Weiss <dawid.weiss@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm fine with either system (or both used concurrently). There is
> significant research effort Tomoko did already and I support this effort:
> +1 from me.
> >
> > Dawid
> >
> > On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 5:40 PM Tomoko Uchida <
> tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone!
> >>
> >> As we had previous discussion thread [1], I propose migration to GitHub
> issue from Jira.
> >> It'd be technically possible (see [2] for details) and I think it'd be
> good for the project - not only for welcoming new developers who are not
> familiar with Jira, but also for improving the experiences of long-term
> committers/contributors by consolidating the conversation platform.
> >>
> >> You can see a short summary of the discussion, some stats on current
> Jira issues, and a draft migration plan in [2].
> >> Please review [2] if you haven't seen it and vote for this proposal.
> >>
> >> The vote will be open until 2022-06-06 16:00 UTC.
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 approve
> >> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >>
> >> Here is my +1
> >>
> >> *IMPORTANT NOTE*
> >> I set a local protocol for this vote.
> >> There are 95 committers on this project [3] - the vote will be
> effective if it successfully gains more than 15% of voters (>= 15) from
> committers (including PMC members). This means, that although only PMC
> member votes are counted for the final result, the votes from all
> committers are important to make the vote result effective.
> >>
> >> If there are less than 15 votes at 2022-06-06 16:00 UTC, I will expand
> the term to 2022-06-13 16:00 UTC. If this fails to get sufficient voters
> after the expanded time limit, I'll cancel this vote regardless of the
> result.
> >> But why do I set such an extra bar? My fear is that if such things are
> decided by the opinions of a few members, the result shouldn't yield a good
> outcome for the future. It isn't my goal to just pass the vote [4].
> >>
> >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/78wj0vll73sct065m5jjm4z8gqb5yffk
> >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557
> >> [3] https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?lucene
> >> [4] I'm sorry for being overly cautious, but I have never met in person
> or virtually any of the committers (with a very few exceptions), therefore
> cannot assess if the vote result is reliable or not unless there is certain
> explicit feedback.
> >>
> >> Tomoko
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 8:47 AM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry I missed the first vote I think; also +1(pmc) from me. I'd be OK
> with some issues (esp. closed ones) being orphaned in the old system
> too.
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 9:20 AM Dawid Weiss <dawid.weiss@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm fine with either system (or both used concurrently). There is
> significant research effort Tomoko did already and I support this effort:
> +1 from me.
> >
> > Dawid
> >
> > On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 5:40 PM Tomoko Uchida <
> tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone!
> >>
> >> As we had previous discussion thread [1], I propose migration to GitHub
> issue from Jira.
> >> It'd be technically possible (see [2] for details) and I think it'd be
> good for the project - not only for welcoming new developers who are not
> familiar with Jira, but also for improving the experiences of long-term
> committers/contributors by consolidating the conversation platform.
> >>
> >> You can see a short summary of the discussion, some stats on current
> Jira issues, and a draft migration plan in [2].
> >> Please review [2] if you haven't seen it and vote for this proposal.
> >>
> >> The vote will be open until 2022-06-06 16:00 UTC.
> >>
> >> [ ] +1 approve
> >> [ ] +0 no opinion
> >> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >>
> >> Here is my +1
> >>
> >> *IMPORTANT NOTE*
> >> I set a local protocol for this vote.
> >> There are 95 committers on this project [3] - the vote will be
> effective if it successfully gains more than 15% of voters (>= 15) from
> committers (including PMC members). This means, that although only PMC
> member votes are counted for the final result, the votes from all
> committers are important to make the vote result effective.
> >>
> >> If there are less than 15 votes at 2022-06-06 16:00 UTC, I will expand
> the term to 2022-06-13 16:00 UTC. If this fails to get sufficient voters
> after the expanded time limit, I'll cancel this vote regardless of the
> result.
> >> But why do I set such an extra bar? My fear is that if such things are
> decided by the opinions of a few members, the result shouldn't yield a good
> outcome for the future. It isn't my goal to just pass the vote [4].
> >>
> >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/78wj0vll73sct065m5jjm4z8gqb5yffk
> >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10557
> >> [3] https://projects.apache.org/committee.html?lucene
> >> [4] I'm sorry for being overly cautious, but I have never met in person
> or virtually any of the committers (with a very few exceptions), therefore
> cannot assess if the vote result is reliable or not unless there is certain
> explicit feedback.
> >>
> >> Tomoko
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>