Apache Hive Project Bylaws
THIS IS A PROPOSED UPDATE TO THE HIVE BYLAWS REGARDING THE STATUS OF COMMITTERS OF CODE THAT IS ADOPTED BY HIVE. TEXT THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED IS STRUCK THROUGH. CODE THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE ADDED IS IN ITALICS.
This document defines the bylaws under which the Apache Hive project operates. It defines the roles and responsibilities of the project, who may vote, how voting works, how conflicts are resolved, etc.
Hive is a project of the Apache Software Foundation. The foundation holds the copyright on Apache code including the code in the Hive codebase. The foundation FAQ explains the operation and background of the foundation.
Hive is typical of Apache projects in that it operates under a set of principles, known collectively as the 'Apache Way'. If you are new to Apache development, please refer to the Incubator Project for more information on how Apache projects operate.
Roles and Responsibilities
Apache projects define a set of roles with associated rights and responsibilities. These roles govern what tasks an individual may perform within the project. The roles are defined in the following sections.
The most important participants in the project are people who use our software. The majority of our contributors start out as users and guide their development efforts from the user's perspective.
Users contribute to the Apache projects by providing feedback to contributors in the form of bug reports and feature suggestions. Also, users participate in the Apache community by helping other users on mailing lists and user support forums.
The project's Committers are responsible for the project's technical management. Committers have access to and responsibility for all of Hive's source code repository.
Committer access is by invitation only and must be approved by lazy consensus of the active PMC members. A Committer is considered emeritus by their own declaration or by not contributing in any form to the project for over six months. An emeritus committer may request reinstatement of commit access from the PMC which will be sufficient to restore him or her to active committer status.
Commit access can be revoked by a unanimous vote of all the active PMC members (except the committer in question if they are also a PMC member).
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.
All Apache committers are required to have a signed Individual Contributor License Agreement (CLA) on file with the Apache Software Foundation. There is a Committer FAQ which provides more details on the requirements for Committers.
A committer who makes a sustained contribution to the project may be invited to become a member of the PMC. The form of contribution is not limited to code. It can also include code review, helping out users on the mailing lists, documentation, etc.
Submodule committers are committers who are responsible for maintenance of a particular submodule of Hive. Committers on submodules have access to and responsibility for a specified subset of Hive's source code repository. Committers on submodules may cast binding votes on any technical discussion regarding that submodule.
Submodule committers are not directly created by the PMC. When Hive adopts new code bases, for example by merging in an existing project, committers on that newly adopted code base become committers on the submodules that correspond to the new code base. The intention is that submodule committers will work towards becoming committers. Submodule committers must be voted on by the PMC in the same way as other Hive contributors to become committers.
All rules that apply to committers regarding transitioning to emeritus status, revocation of commit rights, and having a signed Individual Contributor License Agreement apply to submodule committers as well.
Project Management Committee
The PMC is responsible to the board and the ASF for the management and oversight of the Apache Hive codebase. The responsibilities of the PMC include
- Deciding what is distributed as products of the Apache Hive project. In particular all releases must be approved by the PMC.
- Maintaining the project's shared resources, including the codebase repository, mailing lists, websites.
- Speaking on behalf of the project.
- Resolving license disputes regarding products of the project.
- Nominating new PMC members and committers.
- Maintaining these bylaws and other guidelines of the project.
Membership of the PMC is by invitation only and must be approved by a lazy consensus of active PMC members. A PMC member is considered emeritus by their own declaration or by not contributing in any form to the project for over six months. An emeritus member may request reinstatement to the PMC, which will be sufficient to restore him or her to active PMC member.
Membership of the PMC can be revoked by an unanimous vote of all the active PMC members other than the member in question.
The chair of the PMC is appointed by the ASF board. The chair is an office holder of the Apache Software Foundation (VicePresident, Apache Hive) and has primary responsibility to the board for the management of the projects within the scope of the Hive PMC. The chair reports to the board quarterly on developments within the Hive project.
The chair of the PMC serves for a one year term. When the one year term ends, or if the current chair of the PMC resigns, PMC members vote to recommend a new chair using Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting. See http://wiki.apache.org/general/BoardVoting for specifics. The decision must be ratified by the Apache Board.
All active PMC members, including the current PMC chair, are eligible to run as candidates in the PMC chair election. All active PMC members, including the candidates, are eligible to vote in the PMC chair election.
Within the Hive project, different types of decisions require different forms of approval. For example, the previous section describes several decisions which require 'lazy consensus' approval. This section defines how voting is performed, the types of approvals, and which types of decision require which type of approval.
Decisions regarding the project are made by votes on the primary project development mailing list (
firstname.lastname@example.org@hive.apache.org). Where necessary, PMC voting may take place on the private Hive PMC mailing list. Votes are clearly indicated by subject line starting with [VOTE]. Votes may contain multiple items for approval and these should be clearly separated. Voting is carried out by replying to the vote mail. Voting may take four flavors
'Yes,' 'Agree,' or 'the action should be performed.' In general, this vote also indicates a willingness on the behalf of the voter in 'making it happen'.
This vote indicates a willingness for the action under consideration to go ahead. The voter, however will not be able to help.
This vote indicates that the voter does not, in general, agree with the proposed action but is not concerned enough to prevent the action going ahead.
This is a negative vote. On issues where consensus is required, this vote counts as a veto. All vetoes must contain an explanation of why the veto is appropriate. Vetoes with no explanation are void. It may also be appropriate for a -1 vote to include an alternative course of action.
All participants in the Hive project are encouraged to show their agreement with or against a particular action by voting. For technical decisions, only the votes of active committers are binding. Non binding votes are still useful for those with binding votes to understand the perception of an action in the wider Hive community. For PMC decisions, only the votes of PMC members are binding.
Voting can also be applied to changes already made to the Hive codebase. These typically take the form of a veto (-1) in reply to the commit message sent when the commit is made. Note that this should be a rare occurrence. All efforts should be made to discuss issues when they are still patches before the code is committed.
These are the types of approvals that can be sought. Different actions require different types of approvals.
For this to pass, all voters with binding votes must vote and there can be no binding vetoes (-1). Consensus votes are rarely required due to the impracticality of getting all eligible voters to cast a vote.
Lazy consensus requires 3 binding +1 votes and no binding vetoes.
A lazy majority vote requires 3 binding +1 votes and more binding +1 votes that -1 votes.
An action with lazy approval is implicitly allowed unless a -1 vote is received, at which time, depending on the type of action, either lazy majority or lazy consensus approval must be obtained.
Some actions require a 2/3 majority of active committers or PMC members to pass. Such actions typically affect the foundation of the project (e.g. adopting a new codebase to replace an existing product). The higher threshold is designed to ensure such changes are strongly supported. To pass this vote requires at least 2/3 of binding vote holders to vote +1.
A valid, binding veto cannot be overruled. If a veto is cast, it must be accompanied by a valid reason explaining the reasons for the veto. The validity of a veto, if challenged, can be confirmed by anyone who has a binding vote. This does not necessarily signify agreement with the veto - merely that the veto is valid.
If you disagree with a valid veto, you must lobby the person casting the veto to withdraw their veto. If a veto is not withdrawn, the action that has been vetoed must be reversed in a timely manner.
A change made to a codebase of the project and committed by a committer. This includes source code, documentation, website content, etc.
one +1 from a committer who has not authored the patch followed by a Lazy approval (not counting the vote of the contributor), moving to lazy majority if a -1 is received
Defines the timetable and actions for a release. The plan also nominates a Release Manager.
When a release of one of the project's products is ready, a vote is required to accept the release as an official release of the project.
Active PMC members
Adoption of New Codebase
When the codebase for an existing, released product is to be replaced with an alternative codebase. If such a vote fails to gain approval, the existing code base will continue. This also covers the creation of new sub-projects and submodules within the project.
Active PMC members
When a new committer is proposed for the project.
Active PMC members
New PMC Member
When a committer is proposed for the PMC.
Active PMC members
When removal of commit privileges is sought.
Active PMC members (excluding the committer in question if a member of the PMC).
PMC Member Removal
When removal of a PMC member is sought.
Active PMC members (excluding the member in question).
|Electing PMC Chair||The chair of the PMC serves for a one year term. When the one year term ends, or if the current chair of the PMC resigns, PMC members vote to recommend a new chair.||Single Transferable Voting||Active PMC members including the candidates||N/Aemail@example.com|
Modifying this document.
Active PMC members
|New Branch Committer||When a new branch committer is proposed for the project.||Lazy Consensus||Active PMC firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Removal of Branch Committer||When a branch committer is removed from the project.||Consensus||Active PMC members excluding the committer in question if they are PMC members email@example.com|