Hi there Alberto, There is no explicit requirement to receive any “+1” messages.
I think a good rule of thumb is to: a) To provide a little more time to review any RFC. One week might be a little short, given that we cannot assume that everyone has time to review/work on the project in a full-time capacity. I always think 2-3 weeks is safe. b) If no explicit “+1”s are received after 50% of the allotted review time, maybe a nudge in the DEV list to review the RFC. After those steps have been followed, it would be safe to assume that “consensus by lack of objection” is reached if the deadline has been reached. Thank you for extending. —Udo On May 29, 2020, 12:02 PM -0700, Alberto Bustamante Reyes <alberto.bustamante.re...@est.tech>, wrote: Hi Udo, Thanks for your message, I was not sure if I had to receive explicit +1 messages or not. Of course I prefer to have some feedback before continue so I will extend the deadline until end of next Thursday (4th June), I hope its fine. BR/ Alberto B. ________________________________ De: Udo Kohlmeyer <u...@vmware.com> Enviado: viernes, 29 de mayo de 2020 19:30 Para: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Asunto: RE: [DISCUSS] RFC: New option for serial gw sender dispatcher threads start Hi there Alberto, Thank you for the RFC. Tbh, I don’t know if there should some guidance around the period that we invite comments on. I personally had a really busy week and could not get to the RFC review in the 1 week that I was given. I would like to request that this RFC is extended by 1 more week, to invite comments. I understand that without comments it is reasonable to assume that everyone agrees, but I would prefer that, in this case, we need to get some amount of “+1” comments on this RFC. I fear that we might fall under a false-positive mentality here, if we assume that everyone has read the RFC, had time to think and consider its repercussions, within the 1 week dead line. Hope you can accommodate the extra 1 week extension request. —Udo On May 29, 2020, 1:56 AM -0700, Alberto Bustamante Reyes <alberto.bustamante.re...@est.tech>, wrote: Hi, No comments have been received so far. I have moved the RFC to "in development" state and I will continue with the code implementation. BR/ Alberto B. ________________________________ De: Alberto Bustamante Reyes <alberto.bustamante.re...@est.tech> Enviado: sábado, 23 de mayo de 2020 0:26 Para: dev@geode.apache.org <dev@geode.apache.org> Asunto: [DISCUSS] RFC: New option for serial gw sender dispatcher threads start Hi Geode community, I have posted on the wiki a new RFC about implementing a new option for serial gateway sender creation related with how the dispatcher threads are started. This option will be used only when gateway receivers are configured to share same host and port. This configuration was already discussed on a previous RFC. Please send your comments by Thursday 28th May. https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FGEODE%2FNew%2Boption%2Bfor%2Bserial%2Bgw%2Bsender%2Bdispatcher%2Bthreads%2Bstart&data=02%7C01%7Cudo%40vmware.com%7C286cd3ccd1c544f2e50308d80402cc16%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637263757351787094&sdata=ij1HPHVvJQKZMnrfv%2Fj147ULRhyYtDrDX2StQyD3WKM%3D&reserved=0 Thanks, Alberto B.
