community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com>
Subject Re: Veto! Veto?
Date Sat, 21 Mar 2015 17:18:07 GMT
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> Can someone please link to any place where invitation of committers and of
> PMC members is subject to a veto (as opposed to a need to see if -1
> objections can be cured in discussion of the objection) as a matter of
> policy?

See resolution 7.G from the June 2013 Board minutes.

http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2013/board_minutes_2013_06_19.txt

The official policy is that the Board decides, and under extraordinary
circumstances can even completely reconsitute a PMC through the mechanism of a
Board resolution.  For the common case, though, there are specific procedures
for notifying the Board about new PMC members which result in automatic
changes to PMC composition unless a Board member objects.

*   At any time, the PMC Chair can notify the Board of a proposal to invite a
    new PMC member, and need not point to a VOTE result.
*   Any other PMC member can notify the Board about a candidate, but needs to
    point to "a formal decision by the PMC approving of the appointment".

The Board expects personnel decisions to be made by consensus.  A formal
72-hour VOTE with no -1 votes is one way of demonstrating consensus, but a
DISCUSS thread can be enough if it is clear that consensus has been achieved
and a subsequent VOTE would be a formality.

A project might also establish its own procedures regarding how they achieve
consensus on personnel matters.  The more that those procedures diverge from
the norm, the more scrutiny the project can expect from the Board.

Marvin Humphrey

Mime
View raw message