★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
51 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Salve J Nilsen
Proposal A

David Golden said:

> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 07:15:04
> From: David Golden <[hidden email]>
> Reply-To: "DBIx::Class user and developer list" <[hidden email]>
> To: DBIC Mailing List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: [Dbix-class] ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★
>
> Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the
> various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list of
> Oct 3. [1]
>
> It's time to bring this to a conclusion.
>
> Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets the
> "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he cares
> about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has been having
> and the decision the community is being asked to make.
>
> Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the case
> that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the proposals at
> hand:
>
> * Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as
> "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at
> that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions with an
> unknown owner".
>
> * The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the support
> of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan sufficient to
> disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.
>
> * Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC
> namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the mailing
> list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])
>
> * Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to continue
> development. [3]
>
> * Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the community
> wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued DBIC and the
> community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a proposal [4].  In
> response to concerns about the proposal, Peter volunteered to clarify the
> alternative proposal.
>
> * Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as "Peter
> takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at this
> time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork free of community
> bias". [5]
>
> Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently
> provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession
> should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After
> Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].  This
> target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov 7 [8],
> and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November 10, in the
> middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email thread with
> Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him formalize his
> proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On November 26, I received
> a separate private email telling me I could set a deadline of Dec 1, if
> needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled thread at that point, Peter
> and I briefly discussed what ultimately became his final proposal of Dec 3.
>
> I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the decisions
> at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and because Peter
> originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be public anyway, I am
> now posting the content of that private email thread in full. [11]
>
> Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the future
> of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating, openly
> adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes and
> situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class namespace
> point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the repository,
> mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community itself, etc. is
> undefined and community members may wish to consider that in their decision
> process.
>
> Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias", it's
> clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the table. 
> Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted outright [12], has
> been amended with generally good feedback, and has provisions for future
> self amendment.  I consider it operative in its amended form as soon as this
> vote is concluded, with the only missing piece being what specific
> namespaces it governs.
>
> The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official" DBIC
> is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by a single
> individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill that comes of
> that).  The community may wish to consider the track record and
> personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in weighing a
> decision.
>
> As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or waiting
> for clarification already, and since the options on the table aren't
> materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe further
> discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or clearer
> options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to be resolved
> so everyone can move forward.
>
> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
> shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure
> proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the
> project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
> branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same
> terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active development
> of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how
> to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.
>
> * PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
> shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to another
> of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by choice,
> accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of the
> project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
> branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole discretion.  Peter will
> choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that or a
> separate name.  The community, under the governance proposal, will choose
> whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.
>
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or "me,
> too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
>
> Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.
>
> I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole
> arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer
> namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> [1]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-govern
> ance-and-future-development-td7578987.html
> [2]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustainabilit
> y-td7579228.html
> [3]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-govern
> ance-and-future-development-tp7578987p7579158.html
> [4]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion
> -tp7579168p7579175.html
> [5]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherits-the
> -existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
> [6]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion
> -tp7579168p7579184.html
> [7]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion
> -tp7579168p7579208.html
> [8]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion
> -tp7579168p7579225.html
> [9]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp7579248p75
> 79250.html
> [10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
> [11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
> [12]http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion
> -td7579168.html
>
> --
> David Golden <[hidden email]> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg
>
>

--
#!/usr/bin/env perl
sub AUTOLOAD{$AUTOLOAD=~/.*::(\d+)/;seek(DATA,$1,0);print# Salve Joshua Nilsen
getc DATA}$"="'};&{'";@_=unpack("C*",unpack("u*",':50,$'.#    <[hidden email]>
'3!=0"59,6!`%%P\0!1)46%!F.Q`%01,`'."\n"));eval "&{'@_'}";  __END__ is near! :)

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Andrew Beverley
In reply to this post by David Golden
Abstain

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Aaron Trevena
In reply to this post by David Golden
On 5 December 2016 at 06:15, David Golden <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
> shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure
> proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the
> project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
> branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same
> terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active development
> of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how
> to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.

A vote for Proposal A from me please.

Thanks,

A

--
Aaron J Trevena, BSc Hons
http://www.aarontrevena.co.uk
LAMP System Integration, Development and Consulting

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

James E Keenan
In reply to this post by David Golden
On 12/05/2016 01:15 AM, David Golden wrote:
> Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the
> various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list of
> Oct 3. [1]
>

Proposal A


_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Michele Beltrame-3
In reply to this post by David Golden
Hi!

Proposal A.

Cheers,
Michele.

--
Michele Beltrame
http://www.italpro.net/ - [hidden email]
Skype: arthas77 - Twitter: _arthas

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Roberto Henriquez
In reply to this post by David Golden
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 01:15:04 -0500
David Golden <[hidden email]> wrote:


>
> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
> namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community
> governance structure proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the
> future development of the project, including but not limited to
> stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be
> governed by the community under the same terms.  The community will
> choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that
> name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC
> to a new namespace for independent development.
>
> * PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
> namespaces shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he
> transfers it to another of his choosing or appears permanently
> incommunicado (whether by choice, accident or death).    Decisions
> about the future development of the project, including but not
> limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing
> shall be made at Peter's sole discretion.  Peter will choose
> whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that or a
> separate name.  The community, under the governance proposal, will
> choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent
> development.
>
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1"
> or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
>
> Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.
>
> I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole
> arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer
> namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.
>

Proposal A

--
Roberto Henríquez Laurent
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Chase Whitener
Proposal A.

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Roberto Henriquez
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 01:15:04 -0500
> David Golden <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>>
>> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
>> namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community
>> governance structure proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the
>> future development of the project, including but not limited to
>> stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be
>> governed by the community under the same terms.  The community will
>> choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that
>> name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC
>> to a new namespace for independent development.
>>
>> * PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
>> namespaces shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he
>> transfers it to another of his choosing or appears permanently
>> incommunicado (whether by choice, accident or death).    Decisions
>> about the future development of the project, including but not
>> limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing
>> shall be made at Peter's sole discretion.  Peter will choose
>> whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that or a
>> separate name.  The community, under the governance proposal, will
>> choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent
>> development.
>>
>> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
>> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1"
>> or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
>>
>> Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.
>>
>> I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole
>> arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer
>> namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.
>>
>
> Proposal A
>
> --
> Roberto Henríquez Laurent
> [hidden email]
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
> IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
> SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
> Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Jon Allen (JJ)
In reply to this post by David Golden
Proposal A

JJ Allen

Software Delivery Manager

<img alt="OpusVL" title="OpusVL" src="" class="">

Drury House

Drury Lane

Rugby

CV21 3DE

T: 01788 298 411

M: 07747 63 23 43

E: [hidden email]

W: www.opusvl.com



_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Frank Carnovale
In reply to this post by David Golden
Proposal A.

On 5 December 2016 at 06:15, David Golden <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list of Oct 3. [1]

It's time to bring this to a conclusion.

Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.

Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the proposals at hand:

* Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions with an unknown owner".

* The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.

* Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])

* Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to continue development. [3]

* Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a proposal [4].  In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.

* Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork free of community bias". [5]

Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].  This target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov 7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November 10, in the middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email thread with Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him formalize his proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On November 26, I received a separate private email telling me I could set a deadline of Dec 1, if needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled thread at that point, Peter and I briefly discussed what ultimately became his final proposal of Dec 3.

I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email thread in full. [11]

Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating, openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes and situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class namespace point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community itself, etc. is undefined and community members may wish to consider that in their decision process.

Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias", it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the table.  Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted outright [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has provisions for future self amendment.  I consider it operative in its amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing piece being what specific namespaces it governs.

The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official" DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill that comes of that).  The community may wish to consider the track record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in weighing a decision.

As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or clearer options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to be resolved so everyone can move forward.

Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:

* PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.

* PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to another of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by choice, accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole discretion.  Peter will choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that or a separate name.  The community, under the governance proposal, will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.

List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.

Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.

I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.

Regards,
David

[1] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-td7578987.html
[2] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustainability-td7579228.html
[5] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherits-the-existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
[6] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579184.html
[7] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579208.html
[8] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579225.html
[9] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp7579248p7579250.html
[10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
[11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
--
David Golden <[hidden email]> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...


_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Marc Mims
Proposal A.

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 7:26 AM Frank Carnovale <[hidden email]> wrote:
Proposal A.

On 5 December 2016 at 06:15, David Golden <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list of Oct 3. [1]

It's time to bring this to a conclusion.

Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.

Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the proposals at hand:

* Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions with an unknown owner".

* The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.

* Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])

* Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to continue development. [3]

* Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a proposal [4].  In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.

* Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork free of community bias". [5]

Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].  This target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov 7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November 10, in the middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email thread with Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him formalize his proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On November 26, I received a separate private email telling me I could set a deadline of Dec 1, if needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled thread at that point, Peter and I briefly discussed what ultimately became his final proposal of Dec 3.

I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email thread in full. [11]

Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating, openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes and situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class namespace point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community itself, etc. is undefined and community members may wish to consider that in their decision process.

Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias", it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the table.  Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted outright [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has provisions for future self amendment.  I consider it operative in its amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing piece being what specific namespaces it governs.

The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official" DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill that comes of that).  The community may wish to consider the track record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in weighing a decision.

As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or clearer options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to be resolved so everyone can move forward.

Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:

* PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.

* PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to another of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by choice, accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole discretion.  Peter will choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that or a separate name.  The community, under the governance proposal, will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.

List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.

Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.

I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.

Regards,
David
--
David Golden <[hidden email]> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Mike Rylander
In reply to this post by David Golden
Proposal A

--
Mike Rylander
 | President
 | Equinox Software, Inc. / Open Your Library
 | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
 | email:  [hidden email]
 | web:  http://www.esilibrary.com


On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 1:15 AM, David Golden <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the
> various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list of
> Oct 3. [1]
>
> It's time to bring this to a conclusion.
>
> Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets the
> "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he cares
> about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has been having
> and the decision the community is being asked to make.
>
> Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the case
> that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the proposals at
> hand:
>
> * Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as
> "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at
> that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions with an
> unknown owner".
>
> * The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the support
> of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan sufficient to
> disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.
>
> * Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC
> namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the mailing
> list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])
>
> * Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to continue
> development. [3]
>
> * Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the community
> wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued DBIC and the
> community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a proposal [4].  In
> response to concerns about the proposal, Peter volunteered to clarify the
> alternative proposal.
>
> * Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as "Peter
> takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at this
> time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork free of community
> bias". [5]
>
> Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently
> provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession
> should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After
> Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].  This
> target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov 7 [8],
> and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November 10, in the
> middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email thread with
> Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him formalize his
> proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On November 26, I received
> a separate private email telling me I could set a deadline of Dec 1, if
> needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled thread at that point, Peter
> and I briefly discussed what ultimately became his final proposal of Dec 3.
>
> I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the decisions
> at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and because Peter
> originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be public anyway, I am
> now posting the content of that private email thread in full. [11]
>
> Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the future
> of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating, openly
> adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes and
> situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class namespace
> point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the repository,
> mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community itself, etc. is
> undefined and community members may wish to consider that in their decision
> process.
>
> Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias", it's
> clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the table.
> Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted outright [12], has
> been amended with generally good feedback, and has provisions for future
> self amendment.  I consider it operative in its amended form as soon as this
> vote is concluded, with the only missing piece being what specific
> namespaces it governs.
>
> The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official" DBIC
> is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by a single
> individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill that comes of
> that).  The community may wish to consider the track record and
> personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in weighing a
> decision.
>
> As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or waiting
> for clarification already, and since the options on the table aren't
> materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe further
> discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or clearer
> options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to be resolved
> so everyone can move forward.
>
> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
> shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure
> proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the
> project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
> branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same
> terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active development
> of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how
> to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.
>
> * PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
> shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to another
> of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by choice,
> accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of the
> project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
> branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole discretion.  Peter will
> choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that or a
> separate name.  The community, under the governance proposal, will choose
> whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.
>
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or "me,
> too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
>
> Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.
>
> I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole
> arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer
> namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> [1]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-td7578987.html
> [2]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustainability-td7579228.html
> [3]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-tp7578987p7579158.html
> [4]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579175.html
> [5]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherits-the-existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
> [6]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579184.html
> [7]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579208.html
> [8]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579225.html
> [9]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp7579248p7579250.html
> [10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
> [11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
> [12]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-td7579168.html
>
> --
> David Golden <[hidden email]> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
> IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
> SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
> Searchable Archive:
> http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Sam
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Sam
In reply to this post by David Golden
Proposal A

On 12/05/2016 12:15 AM, David Golden wrote:

> Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the
> various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list
> of Oct 3. [1]
>
> It's time to bring this to a conclusion.
>
> Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets
> the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he
> cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has
> been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.
>
> Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the
> case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the
> proposals at hand:
>
> * Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as
> "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
> where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions
> with an unknown owner".
>
> * The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the
> support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan
> sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.
>
> * Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC
> namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the
> mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])
>
> * Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to
> continue development. [3]
>
> * Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the
> community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued
> DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a
> proposal [4].  In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter
> volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.
>
> * Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as
> "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
> where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork
> free of community bias". [5]
>
> Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently
> provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession
> should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After
> Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].
> This target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov
> 7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November
> 10, in the middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email
> thread with Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him
> formalize his proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On
> November 26, I received a separate private email telling me I could set
> a deadline of Dec 1, if needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled
> thread at that point, Peter and I briefly discussed what ultimately
> became his final proposal of Dec 3.
>
> I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the
> decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and
> because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be
> public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email thread
> in full. [11]
>
> Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the
> future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating,
> openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes
> and situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class
> namespace point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the
> repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community
> itself, etc. is undefined and community members may wish to consider
> that in their decision process.
>
> Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias",
> it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the
> table.  Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted
> outright [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has
> provisions for future self amendment.  I consider it operative in its
> amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing
> piece being what specific namespaces it governs.
>
> The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official"
> DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by
> a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill
> that comes of that).  The community may wish to consider the track
> record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in
> weighing a decision.
>
> As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or
> waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table
> aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe
> further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or
> clearer options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to
> be resolved so everyone can move forward.
>
> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
> shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure
> proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the
> project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
> branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same
> terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active
> development of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will
> choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent
> development.
>
> * PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
> shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to
> another of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by
> choice, accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of
> the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new
> development, branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole
> discretion.  Peter will choose whether/how to continue active
> development of DBIC under that or a separate name.  The community, under
> the governance proposal, will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new
> namespace for independent development.
>
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or
> "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
>
> Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.
>
> I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole
> arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer
> namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> [1]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-td7578987.html
> [2]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustainability-td7579228.html
> [3]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-tp7578987p7579158.html
> [4]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579175.html
> [5]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherits-the-existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
> [6]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579184.html
> [7]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579208.html
> [8]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579225.html
> [9]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp7579248p7579250.html
> [10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
> [11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
> [12]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-td7579168.html
>
> --
> David Golden <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
> IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
> SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
> Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
>


_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Renvoize, Martin
Proposal A

Martin Renvoize

Development Manager


 

T: +44 (0) 1483 378728

F: +44 (0) 800 756 6384

E: [hidden email]

www.ptfs-europe.com

 



Registered in the United Kingdom No. 06416372   VAT Reg No. 925 7211 30


The information contained in this email message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please email the sender at [hidden email]



On 5 December 2016 at 16:44, Sam <[hidden email]> wrote:
Proposal A


On 12/05/2016 12:15 AM, David Golden wrote:
Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the
various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list
of Oct 3. [1]

It's time to bring this to a conclusion.

Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets
the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he
cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has
been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.

Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the
case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the
proposals at hand:

* Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as
"Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions
with an unknown owner".

* The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the
support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan
sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.

* Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC
namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the
mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])

* Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to
continue development. [3]

* Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the
community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued
DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a
proposal [4].  In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter
volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.

* Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as
"Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork
free of community bias". [5]

Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently
provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession
should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After
Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].
This target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov
7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November
10, in the middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email
thread with Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him
formalize his proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On
November 26, I received a separate private email telling me I could set
a deadline of Dec 1, if needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled
thread at that point, Peter and I briefly discussed what ultimately
became his final proposal of Dec 3.

I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the
decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and
because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be
public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email thread
in full. [11]

Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the
future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating,
openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes
and situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class
namespace point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the
repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community
itself, etc. is undefined and community members may wish to consider
that in their decision process.

Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias",
it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the
table.  Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted
outright [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has
provisions for future self amendment.  I consider it operative in its
amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing
piece being what specific namespaces it governs.

The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official"
DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by
a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill
that comes of that).  The community may wish to consider the track
record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in
weighing a decision.

As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or
waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table
aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe
further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or
clearer options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to
be resolved so everyone can move forward.

Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:

* PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure
proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the
project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same
terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active
development of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will
choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent
development.

* PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to
another of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by
choice, accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of
the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new
development, branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole
discretion.  Peter will choose whether/how to continue active
development of DBIC under that or a separate name.  The community, under
the governance proposal, will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new
namespace for independent development.

List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or
"me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.

Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.

I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole
arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer
namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.

Regards,
David

[1]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-td7578987.html
[2]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustainability-td7579228.html
[3]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-tp7578987p7579158.html
[4]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579175.html
[5]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherits-the-existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
[6]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579184.html
[7]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579208.html
[8]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579225.html
[9]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp7579248p7579250.html
[10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
[11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
[12]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-td7579168.html

--
David Golden <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg


_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...



_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

John Napiorkowski
Proposal A




On Monday, December 5, 2016 11:15 AM, "Renvoize, Martin" <[hidden email]> wrote:


Proposal A

Martin Renvoize
Development Manager

 
T: +44 (0) 1483 378728
F: +44 (0) 800 756 6384
 


Registered in the United Kingdom No. 06416372   VAT Reg No. 925 7211 30

The information contained in this email message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please email the sender at [hidden email]


On 5 December 2016 at 16:44, Sam <[hidden email]> wrote:
Proposal A


On 12/05/2016 12:15 AM, David Golden wrote:
Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the
various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list
of Oct 3. [1]

It's time to bring this to a conclusion.

Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets
the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he
cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has
been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.

Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the
case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the
proposals at hand:

* Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as
"Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions
with an unknown owner".

* The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the
support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan
sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.

* Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC
namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the
mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])

* Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to
continue development. [3]

* Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the
community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued
DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a
proposal [4].  In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter
volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.

* Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as
"Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork
free of community bias". [5]

Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently
provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession
should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After
Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].
This target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov
7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November
10, in the middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email
thread with Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him
formalize his proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On
November 26, I received a separate private email telling me I could set
a deadline of Dec 1, if needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled
thread at that point, Peter and I briefly discussed what ultimately
became his final proposal of Dec 3.

I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the
decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and
because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be
public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email thread
in full. [11]

Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the
future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating,
openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes
and situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class
namespace point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the
repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community
itself, etc. is undefined and community members may wish to consider
that in their decision process.

Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias",
it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the
table.  Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted
outright [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has
provisions for future self amendment.  I consider it operative in its
amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing
piece being what specific namespaces it governs.

The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official"
DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by
a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill
that comes of that).  The community may wish to consider the track
record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in
weighing a decision.

As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or
waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table
aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe
further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or
clearer options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to
be resolved so everyone can move forward.

Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:

* PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure
proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the
project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development,
branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same
terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active
development of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will
choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent
development.

* PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces
shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to
another of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by
choice, accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of
the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new
development, branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole
discretion.  Peter will choose whether/how to continue active
development of DBIC under that or a separate name.  The community, under
the governance proposal, will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new
namespace for independent development.

List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or
"me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.

Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.

I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole
arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer
namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.

Regards,
David

[1]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion -of-DBIC-governance-and- future-development-td7578987. html
[2]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance- and-sustainability-td7579228. html
[3]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion -of-DBIC-governance-and- future-development-tp7578987p7 579158.html
[4]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation -and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579 175.html
[5]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/Decision-time-which- fork-inherits-the-existing- DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255 .html
[6]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation -and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579 184.html
[7]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation -and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579 208.html
[8]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation -and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579 225.html
[9]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/An-answer-and-a-questi on-tp7579248p7579250.html
[10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/83 6e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
[11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/95 5519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
[12]
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nab ble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation -and-conclusion-td7579168.html

--
David Golden <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg


______________________________ _________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-b in/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/r epos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/ dbix-class@...



_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...



_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

VanDerPoel, Ian
In reply to this post by David Golden

Proposal A

 

From: David Golden [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Monday, 5 December 2016 5:15 PM
To: DBIC Mailing List
Subject: [Dbix-class]
VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control



This message (including any attachments) is intended solely for the addressee named and may contain confidential and or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,please delete it and notify the sender. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of Independent Transport Safety Regulator (ITSR). Whole or parts of this e-mail may be subject to copyright of ITSR or third parties. You should only re-transmit, distribute or use the material for commercial purposes if you are authorised to do so.

Please visit us http://www.transportregulator.nsw.gov.au

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance andNamespace Control ★

John Stoffel
In reply to this post by David Golden

Proposal A

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance andNamespace Control ★

Karen Etheridge
Proposal A.


_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance andNamespace Control ★

Len Jaffe

Proposal A.


 

--
Len Jaffe - Information Technology Smoke Jumper - [hidden email] 
614-404-4214    @LenJaffe  www.lenjaffe.com
Curator of Advent Planet - An Aggregation of Online Advent Calendars.


_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Charlie Garrison
In reply to this post by David Golden
Proposal A

cng

--

   Charlie Garrison  <[hidden email]>
   github.com/cngarrison   metacpan.org/author/CNG

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ★ VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ★

Sym Kat
In reply to this post by David Golden
Proposal A

On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 10:15 PM, David Golden <[hidden email]> wrote:
Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading the various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC list of Oct 3. [1]

It's time to bring this to a conclusion.

Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN.  While that may be all he cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.

Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the proposals at hand:

* Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park permissions with an unknown owner".

* The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.

* Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])

* Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to continue development. [3]

* Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized a proposal [4].  In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.

* Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X", where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class fork free of community bias". [5]

Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has consistently provided minimal details on his plans, particularly regarding succession should he no longer be able to or wish to continue development.  After Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he would clarify by Nov 1 [6].  This target date then slipped to Nov 5 [7], was pushed back again on Nov 7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or else Thanksgiving [9].  On November 10, in the middle of this sequence of delays, I started a private email thread with Peter asking if there was anything I could do to help him formalize his proposal, but the thread stalled on the Nov 14.  On November 26, I received a separate private email telling me I could set a deadline of Dec 1, if needed [10].  In our continuation of the stalled thread at that point, Peter and I briefly discussed what ultimately became his final proposal of Dec 3.

I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email thread in full. [11]

Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating, openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the stakes and situation than the simpler question of "where does the DBIx::Class namespace point".  What an adversarial fork means for the future of the repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module ecosystem, and community itself, etc. is undefined and community members may wish to consider that in their decision process.

Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias", it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the table.  Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted outright [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has provisions for future self amendment.  I consider it operative in its amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing piece being what specific namespaces it governs.

The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official" DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or by a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and ill that comes of that).  The community may wish to consider the track record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in weighing a decision.

As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or clearer options for the future of DBIC.  It is time for this dispute to be resolved so everyone can move forward.

Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:

* PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community governance structure proposed by Matt Trout.  Decisions about the future development of the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be governed by the community under the same terms.  The community will choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that name or a separate name.  Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.

* PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related namespaces shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he transfers it to another of his choosing or appears permanently incommunicado (whether by choice, accident or death).    Decisions about the future development of the project, including but not limited to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole discretion.  Peter will choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that or a separate name.  The community, under the governance proposal, will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.

List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B".  Other responses, such as "+1" or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.

Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.

I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter.  I will be sole arbiter of any voting irregularities.  Once announced, I will transfer namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.

Regards,
David

[1] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governance-and-future-development-td7578987.html
[2] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustainability-td7579228.html
[5] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherits-the-existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
[6] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579184.html
[7] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579208.html
[8] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-tp7579168p7579225.html
[9] http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp7579248p7579250.html
[10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
[11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
--
David Golden <[hidden email]> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg

_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...


_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@...
123