cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Noels <stev...@outerthought.org>
Subject Re: [PMC] bootstrapping the PMC
Date Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:41:16 GMT
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

> Find below the voting procedures taken from the Avalon PMC (they have 
> not yet finalized them). I've changed all references to Avalon and added 
> one paragraph (tagged appropriately below)

More colloquially: when will normal, lazy-consensus votes be used, and 
when PMC votes? Some situations:

  - releases
  - new committers
  - code donations

I understand releases need a PMC vote. New committers: I'm not sure. PMC 
should be informed, but no real vote. Code donations: I guess so (for 
oversight reasons).

<snip type="agree"/>

> How to Vote
> ===========
> 
> The voter responds to the call for vote with an expression of support, 
> opposition, or abstention. The exact way to express the voter's position 
> is listed below:
> 
>     * +1 a vote supporting the subject
>     * +0 a vote abstaining from the subject (but showing some support).
>     * -0 a vote abstaining from the subject (but showing disapproval).
>     * -1 a vote opposing the subject
> 
> <added author="SM">
> Any opposive vote must contain a detailed description of the reasoning 
> that led to that vote and potentially indicate an alternative proposal 
> that he/she would favor.
> </added>

I'm pretty -/+0 on these +/-0 PMC votes ;)

Seriously: they only serve to influence others, but do not help in 
reaching a decision. I would stick to:

  +1 : agree
  O  : abstain
  -1 : disagree

Anyway, do these +/-0 votes count in reaching a quorum?

We should think carefully about adding the *requirement* for a detailed 
description for an opposite vote. IMHO, votes are there for situations 
where lazy consensus doesn't work, i.e. when people disagree. PMC votes 
are there for other reasons as well (see above), but still, a vote is 
being held when important points are raised, or directional discussions 
exists. Given the project only exists within a community, continued 
development will depend on a majority of people stating support for a 
certain direction. That doesn't mean the minority (the -1'ers) should go 
at length explaining themselves before their vote is valid. Just some 
thought.

<snip type="agree"/>

> Quorum
> ------
> 
> For all votes, there must be at least three (3) voters and half (1/2) of 
> the PMC must cast a vote.

Why don't we simply say: half of the PMC must vote?

> After the Vote
> ==============
> 
> When the vote is closed, the results of the vote are summarized by the 
> Vote Administrator. The vote administrator will send an email to the 
> Avalon developers or PMC list with the text "[PMC:VOTE-RESULT]" in the 
   ^^^^^^            ^^
                     and?


<snip type="agree"/>

</Steven>
-- 
Steven Noels                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at            http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org                stevenn at apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message