avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Berin Loritsch" <blorit...@citi-us.com>
Subject RE: [Avalon] Call for Revote: Too much voted on in too little time.
Date Tue, 19 Nov 2002 16:04:22 GMT
> From: Leo Sutic [mailto:leo.sutic@inspireinfrastructure.com]
> 
> Berin,
> 
> I doubt that a three-week voting process as you outline would 
> neccessarily lead to a better result. 

I beg to differ.  For one thing, I would actually be able to vote.
Others will actually be able to vote who wanted to, and didn't
even know the vote was happening.

> The PMC charter and bylaws, rotating chair, etc. need not be 
> set in stone before we can start. In fact, if we had to specify 
> every detail in writing before the charter, we would probably 
> never get anything going. We don't write software by first doing 
> one big design up front, then coding - instead we start of with 
> a best-guess and see how it survives contact with reality. The 
> we modify and adapt it to the *real* needs. There is no reason 
> to consider the charter and bylaws as something rigid and forever 
> unchanging and that they should be designed that way.

I am not saying it is forever unchanging.  I am saying that we
need to put down the rules and regulations which govern its
modification.  The Charter and bylaws should be general enough.
If there seems to be an impassable point no one can agree on,
then the original cookie-cutter Apache bylaws apply.

> The moment we think everything must be set in stone, you'll see
> all the factions we have do the sensible thing - that is, try
> to get *their* pet things into that stone writing. End result?
> Nothing.

No.  I am not saying it is set in stone.  I am saying that if
we want a rotating chair, we should explicitly have it stated.
Relying on the good-heartedness of people is problematic.  Some
will forget the rotating chair requirement, and some will stay
longer than originally agreed upon--and there will be nothing
we can do.

Things as fundamental as rotating chair and voting/commit
rights need to be well understood.  Otherwise, peoples feelings
will be hurt if their understanding proves not to be true.

> The PMC proposal as given is not detailed. Good. That means that
> any social problems we have will have to be fought the way they 
> are supposed to be fought, and not in CVS or via PMC charter 
> texts.

It is good that it is not detailed.  However, there was not
enough time to properly review it as it was.  Any legalese
or contract that we would be required to sign needs to be
agreed upon.


> Additionally, I find strange that we're voting on a voting.
> When will anybody call a vote for how this re-voting will be
> counted (majority, concensus, etc.) and how/when do we do that 
> vote?

The prior voting was rushed, and forced.  We were not given even
a weeks notice before voting was to be started, nor were we given
a week to vote within.  I really don't think that the results
were valid.  If we come around to the same decision at the
end of this, then hooray for our side.  The bottom line is that
I feel that my hand is forced in this thing, and not everyone
has had the opportunity to properly review the facts.

To compound matters, we have had three things decided in one vote.
One of those things would cause me to vote -1, although I might
be fine with the other two.  However, because my schedule wouldn't
allow me to get in the two day voting window my voice could not
be heard.

As to how counted and when we voted, I am willing to discuss
the alternatives.  The important thing is that #1 we have enough
advance notice that official tallies are being taken (three days
is not enough), and #2 we have a sufficient voting window that
we can reasonably be counted.

> I vote against this re-vote procedure. It's the first iteration
> of an endless loop.

I contest that the prior vote is not valid, and this would be
considered the first vote.  When there is proper and sufficient
time for voting procedures, there is no reason for a revote.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message