On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 5:39 AM, patrick o'leary <pjaol@pjaol.com> wrote:
Hows that?
Which vote has been passed? 1,2 or 3?
Considering how much has been discussed / altered in email threads, what's
actually been voted upon?
The proposition is definitely unclear, and needs full fleshing out and
discussion before another vote is called.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Yonik Seeley <yonik@apache.org> wrote:
Thanks everyone, this vote has passed.
A bit more contentious of a PMC vote than usual, but the committer
vote was clear.
While I have voted +1 I have to admin that I don't know which vote has passed or
if at all. The noise on this vote / issue was extremely high from a
community side I rather consider this as being far away from a
consensus decision. I have to agree with chris that due to all the
community discussions and arguments on the issue some might change
their mind or come up with a proposal that work better for everybody.
Lets wait a week or two, discuss again and vote again. Unless we don't
get a clear vote without all this discussions I'd say there is still
something "wrong" with the proposal.
Don't get me wrong, I agree the committer vote was kind of clear but
both projects are more than a list of committers and if the community
is unhappy we should take the time and revise such a major structural
/ procedural change. Are we in a rush!? I don't think so.
Simon
-Yonik
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Yonik Seeley <yseeley@gmail.com> wrote:
Apoligies in advance for calling yet another vote, but I just wanted
to make sure this was official.
Mike's second VOTE thread could probably technically stand on it's own
(since it included PMC votes), but given that I said in my previous
VOTE thread that I was just polling Lucene/Solr committers and would
call a second PMC vote, that may have acted to suppress PMC votes on
Mike's thread also.
Please vote for the proposal quoted below to merge lucene/solr
development.
Here's my +1
-Yonik
Mike's call for a VOTE (amongst lucene/solr committers +11 to -1):
http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/a400ffe62ae21aca/vote_merge_the_development_of_solr_lucene_take_2#22d7cd086d9c5cf0
Subject: Merge the development of Solr/Lucene (take 2)
A new vote, that slightly changes proposal from last vote (adding only
that Lucene can cut a release even if Solr doesn't):
* Merging the dev lists into a single list.
* Merging committers.
* When any change is committed (to a module that "belongs to" Solr or
to Lucene), all tests must pass.
* Release details will be decided by dev community, but, Lucene may
release without Solr.
* Modulariize the sources: pull things out of Lucene's core (break
out query parser, move all core queries & analyzers under their
contrib counterparts), pull things out of Solr's core (analyzers,
queries).
These things would not change:
* Besides modularizing (above), the source code would remain factored
into separate dirs/modules the way it is now.
* Issue tracking remains separate (SOLR-XXX and LUCENE-XXX
issues).
* User's lists remain separate.
* Web sites remain separate.
* Release artifacts/jars remain separate.
