attic-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henk P. Penning" <>
Subject Re: Discussion to select chair candidates followed by a vote starting may 13 2018.
Date Wed, 02 May 2018 05:43:37 GMT
On Tue, 1 May 2018, Jan Iversen wrote:

> Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 22:46:41 +0200
> From: Jan Iversen <>
> To:
> Subject: Discussion to select chair candidates followed by a vote starting may
>      13 2018.

Hi Jan,

   I thought the plan was to reach consensus, and otherwise vote.

   Let me try to reach consensus this way :

     Hi Sebb,

       Can we agree to just let Jan pick a winner ?
       and for us to forever hold our peace (regarding the choice)?

       This is a bike-shed problem ;
       any simple solution is ok.

   [ Forgive my ignorance if this is against etiquette.
     How does a PMC resolve bike-shed problems ?


   Henk Penning

------------------------------------------------------------   _
Henk P. Penning, ICT-beta                 R Uithof MG-403    _/ \_
Faculty of Science, Utrecht University    T +31 30 253 4106 / \_/ \
Leuvenlaan 4, 3584CE Utrecht, NL          F +31 30 253 4553 \_/ \_/ M     \_/

> Hi
> I am truly sorry having to write this email. I am embarrassed of not being able to keep
my promise and stay as a long-term chair, but sometimes you have to ask yourself is it worth
the time spent and instead use time where it is makes a difference.
> Considering we have a very silent community and the current site maintenance was unacceptable
to me, I spent a couple of days to make my life easier and asked for opinions from the community
before changing the production site, after that our list drowned in emails from 2 pmc members
pursuing other solutions.
> This is not the first time we have a situation like this, a while ago we had long discussion
with -1 flowing around, between the same 2 PMC members about rewriting rules etc, where finally
(I believe partly due to my intervention) consensus was reached.
> I volunteered to be chair and was clear it meant I had not only to file board reports
but also do the bulk part of retiring projects. I did not volunteer to spend endless hours
trying to get consensus or to get simple changes agreed on.
> I proposed a very simple solution, but have accepted that the other 2 solutions each
have advantages, so I might have continued had I believed in the possibility of consensus
and an, for me, easy to maintain solution. There are no signs of convergence and a vote on
technical solutions are bad, apart from the fact that I am convinced both solutions would
receive a -1. Changes are high, that the current deadlock will end with no change at all.
> I humbly accept my failure to help bring consensus and progress to the attic, so I hereby
announce my retirement as chair/pmc/committer.
> I am hereby starting a discussion on who should be the next chair. The discussion will
run until 13 may 2018, where I will start the formal vote. The result of the vote will be
added to the agenda for the board June meeting. In case we have no positive result of the
vote, the board will be asked to appoint a new chair.
> The 2 PMC members have each promised to support a future site, so it is natural for me
to  propose Henkp and Sebb as chair candidates, both have used significant time to implement
technical elegant solutions.
> Ball is rolling, let the community decide.
> rgds
> Jan I
> Sent from my iPad

View raw message