Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [microprofile-wg] [BALLOT][COMPLETE][Release Review] MicroProfile 6.0

I assume this is documented somewhere? Either way, this seems like a bit of a technicality. Is the answer to simply re-run the ballot to include Primeton this time?
 

From: microprofile-wg <microprofile-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Steve Millidge (Payara) <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2022 5:16 PM
To: Microprofile WG discussions <microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [microprofile-wg] [BALLOT][COMPLETE][Release Review] MicroProfile 6.0
 
As I mentioned earlier doesn't MP not require a supermajority for a vote of this kind in its charter?

From: microprofile-wg <microprofile-wg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2022 9:47:14 PM
To: Microprofile WG discussions <microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [microprofile-wg] [BALLOT][COMPLETE][Release Review] MicroProfile 6.0
 

I am following up on Paul Buck’s note that we wanted to review the result of this ballot. 


Upon review, we deem that this ballot did not pass and thus the MicroProfile 6.0 Release Review was not passed. 


The short version is that it is because Primeton had not appointed their representative at the start of the vote.


Before elaborating, I want to inform everyone that we are being deliberate about the interpretation of the rules and the outcome as there are significant intellectual property implications that are dependent on whether the ballot has passed. Further, I'd like to acknowledge that we believe that everybody was operating in good faith and that our interpretation of the rules is in no way intended to suggest otherwise.

The determination of who is eligible to vote is determined at the onset of any vote. In this case, the vote began on November 22/2022.  At that time, Primeton had not yet appointed their representative to the Steering Committee, and as such she was not eligible to have her ballot count, either to determine quorum or the outcome of the vote. As a reminder, all members of the MicroProfile working group are eligible to appoint an individual to serve on the Steering Committee; however, there is no obligation to do so.  As a result, until such time as an individual is appointed, there is no consideration of that member’s potential representation in the computation of quorum or being eligible to vote on any matter.  


As a result, there were only nine eligible voters for this particular election. Of those nine, as shown in the results, five voted in favor, three against, and one abstained.  In accordance with our Bylaws, the abstention is not counted in either the numerator or denominator, and thus the computation is based on the five in favor of eight non-abstentions total, for a result of 62.5%.  Given this is less than the 2/3 majority required, this means the ballot did not pass. 


Note the EFSP defines a super-majority to be two-thirds of the eligible voters and that specification ballots require a super-majority to pass. Working group charters for specification based working groups including MicroProfile list the EFSP as a governing document.

Wayne

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 2:59 PM Paul Buck <paul.buck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

All,

We are reviewing whether this ballot should be deemed as having passed. We will provide as quickly as possible a detailed explanation of why this is the case, and to provide our determination, but nonetheless we wanted to note this on the mailing list immediately to ensure that no committers begin to take actions based on the assumption it has passed.  

As I am going on PTO on Thursday, it will be another member of the Eclipse team who will provide the further detail.

Thanks for your understanding.

... Paul


On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 12:19 PM Emily Jiang via microprofile-wg <microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I declare this ballot complete and approved. The summary of the votes is below.

Representative Representative for: Vote
Summers Pittman, Vincent Mayers Atlanta JUG +1
Emily Jiang, Nathan Rauh IBM +1
John Clingan, Roberto Cortez Red Hat -1
David Blevins, Amelia Eiras Tomitribe -1
Chandra Guntur, Michael Redlich Garden State Java User Group -1
Ed Bratt, Dmitry Kornilov Oracle +1
Jan Westerkamp, Heiko Rupp iJUG +0
Kenji Kazumura, Takahiro Nagao Fujitsu +1
Reza Rahman, Ed Burns Microsoft +1
Mingyue Huang Primeton +1

Total 6

p.s. (super majority achieved. 2/3*9=6; each +0 means removing one the denominator)

Even though the ballot was concluded successfully, the raised issues will be addressed in the upcoming releases Feb/June 2023.
--
Thanks,
Emily on behalf of MicroProfile Steering Committee

_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
_______________________________________________
microprofile-wg mailing list
microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg


--

Wayne Beaton

Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation


My working day may not be your working day! Please don’t feel obliged to read or reply to this e-mail outside of your normal working hours.


Back to the top