Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[VOTE] Replace codeowners with more relevant automation #10471

Closed
areusch opened this issue Mar 3, 2022 · 17 comments
Closed

[VOTE] Replace codeowners with more relevant automation #10471

areusch opened this issue Mar 3, 2022 · 17 comments
Assignees

Comments

@areusch
Copy link
Contributor

areusch commented Mar 3, 2022

Hi all,

This is a formal vote thread to determine committer and PMC support for [RFC] Replace codeowners with more relevant automation. Replying +1 here means you support the RFC and we should merge it. This vote thread is due to the fact that the RFC proposes a change in the way the community operates (namely the way code-review works). This also signals the final comment period on that RFC, which will conclude with this vote.

We'll leave this vote thread open for a week, and make a decision then.

Thanks,
Andrew

Please vote:
+1 I support the RFC
0 I'm happy either way
-1 I do not support the RFC and it should not be merged.

@apache/tvm-committers

@areusch areusch self-assigned this Mar 3, 2022
@mbrookhart
Copy link
Contributor

+1

4 similar comments
@masahi
Copy link
Member

masahi commented Mar 3, 2022

+1

@junrushao
Copy link
Member

+1

@tmoreau89
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@shingjan
Copy link

shingjan commented Mar 3, 2022

+1

@hogepodge
Copy link
Contributor

hogepodge commented Mar 3, 2022

enthusiastic +1 from community contributor

@mehrdadh
Copy link
Member

mehrdadh commented Mar 3, 2022

+1

2 similar comments
@vinx13
Copy link
Member

vinx13 commented Mar 3, 2022

+1

@tqchen
Copy link
Member

tqchen commented Mar 3, 2022

+1

@kparzysz-quic
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not particularly unhappy with the current situation, but it could be improved.
+1

@jcf94
Copy link
Contributor

jcf94 commented Mar 4, 2022

+1

2 similar comments
@comaniac
Copy link
Contributor

comaniac commented Mar 4, 2022

+1

@AndrewZhaoLuo
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@Lunderberg
Copy link
Contributor

+1

2 similar comments
@manupak
Copy link
Contributor

manupak commented Mar 7, 2022

+1

@Hzfengsy
Copy link
Member

Hzfengsy commented Mar 8, 2022

+1

@areusch
Copy link
Contributor Author

areusch commented Mar 10, 2022

Hi all,

The vote result is +16:
+1: 16 votes (5 binding)
0: no votes
-1: no votes

Therefore the resolution is accepted and the RFC will be merged.

Thanks!
Andrew

@areusch areusch closed this as completed Mar 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests