This document defines the bylaws under which the Apache Impala project operates. It defines the roles and responsibilities of the project, who may vote, how voting works, how conflicts are resolved, etc.
Impala is a project of the Apache Software Foundation. The foundation holds the trademark on the name "Impala" and copyright on Apache code including the code in the Impala codebase. The foundation FAQ explains the operation and background of the foundation.
Impala 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 "How the ASF works" for more information on how Apache projects operate.
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.
Users contribute to the Apache projects by providing feedback to developers in the form of bug reports and feature suggestions. As well, users participate in the Apache community by helping other users on mailing lists and user support forums.
All of the volunteers who are contributing time, code, documentation, or resources to the Impala Project. A contributor that makes sustained, welcome contributions to the project may be invited to become a Committer, though the exact timing of such invitations depends on many factors.
The project's Committers are responsible for the project's technical management. Committers have write access to the project's version control repositories. Committers may cast binding votes on any technical discussion.
Committer access is by invitation only and must be approved by consensus approval of the PMC members.
Significant, pervasive features may be developed in a speculative branch of the repository. The PMC may grant commit rights on the branch to its consistent contributors for the duration of the initiative. 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 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, testing, etc.
A Release Manager (RM) is a committer who volunteers to produce a Release Candidate. The RM shall publish a Release Plan on the dev@ list stating the branch from which they intend to make a Release Candidate, at least one week before they do so. The RM is responsible for building consensus around the content of the Release Candidate, in order to achieve a successful Product Release vote.
The Project Management Committee (PMC) is responsible to the board and the ASF for the management and oversight of the Apache Impala codebase. The responsibilities of the PMC include
Membership of the PMC is by invitation only and must be approved by a consensus approval of PMC members.
The chair of the PMC is appointed by the ASF board. The chair is an office holder of the Apache Software Foundation (Vice President, Apache Impala) and has primary responsibility to the board for the management of the projects within the scope of the Impala PMC. The chair reports to the board quarterly on developments within the Impala project.
The chair of the PMC is rotated annually. When the chair is rotated or if the current chair of the PMC resigns, the PMC votes to recommend a new chair using Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting. See BoardVoting for specifics. The decision must be ratified by the Apache board.
Within the Impala project, different types of decisions require different forms of approval. For example, the previous section describes several decisions which require "consensus approval" 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 (email@example.com). Where necessary, PMC voting may take place on the private Impala 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
Patches are reviewed in the code review tool, where the vote flavors are:
All participants in the Impala project are encouraged to show their agreement with or against a particular action by voting. For technical decisions, only the votes of committers are binding. Non binding votes are still useful for those with binding votes to understand the perception of an action in the wider Impala community. For PMC decisions, only the votes of PMC members are binding.
These are the types of approvals that can be sought. Different actions require different types of approvals
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, any action that has been vetoed must be reversed in a timely manner.
This section describes the various actions which are undertaken within the project, the corresponding approval required for that action and those who have binding votes over the action.
A change made to a codebase of the project and committed by a committer. This includes source code, documentation, website content, etc.
At least one +2 from a committer and no -1 from any committer.
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.
Lazy Majority of PMC members
Speculative branches may be used for significant, pervasive features, or release managers may create branches to test and stabilize release candidates.
Lazy consensus of PMC members
When a branch committer is proposed for the PMC
Lazy consensus of PMC members
When a new committer is proposed for the project
Consensus approval of PMC members
When a committer is proposed for the PMC
Consensus approval of PMC members
When removal of commit privileges is sought or when the branch is merged to the mainline
Lazy 2/3 majority of PMC members
When removal of commit privileges is sought. Note: Such actions will also be referred to the ASF board by the PMC chair
Lazy 2/3 majority of PMC members (excluding the committer in question if a member of the PMC).
When removal of a PMC member is sought. Note: Such actions require approval from the ASF board of directors.
Lazy 2/3 majority of PMC members (excluding the PMC member in question)
Modifying this document.
Lazy majority of PMC members
Votes are open for a period of 72 hours (excluding weekends in the timezone of the person who called the vote) to allow all voters time to consider the vote. Votes relating to code changes are not subject to a strict timetable but should be made as timely as possible.