Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D28D200C54 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:38:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 1B9B7160BB1; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:38:30 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 628A9160BAF for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:38:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 82150 invoked by uid 500); 29 Mar 2017 05:38:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@community.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@community.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@community.apache.org Received: (qmail 82136 invoked by uid 99); 29 Mar 2017 05:38:23 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:38:22 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8AE39183A62 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:38:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.879 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sjQQWcM97xtf for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:38:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com (mail-wm0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id EC1FE5F253 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:38:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id o81so13722494wmb.1 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:38:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=iQMyIYuDOxYoo4eBfVirzxXUdzvdY7mZfh6ER58MAjY=; b=RgLMSrRhAIupPtnUMS/kp9PGcA2DHzHkw+UG0FIcqg3rClu32CTjLxGuX22q/97erQ 9HsIABAnrqLNIqIvycOyz2/sFKCp0BUgQAhQr84jDg9mzB3dsVl5TciZmfVZKOxQMBJs Yf7tA0vwcQuLR/K7CsW78cich9K3udqGpuIvKbEclFLY7Ytdl3xupZEJJQwekO8lYZ9w V8C46FTNRVUtgzct7xBsJkD+iZzpn37iytnNag6gWRrOQnhKj0+1sMTIi84344h5zLiK JYtakgN0kS+6MEZh5UUKwOZOB6e8B8bibC+WNZ9og7hWEbSeyuAmFtBggTkEPx6Lp6jR DF2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=iQMyIYuDOxYoo4eBfVirzxXUdzvdY7mZfh6ER58MAjY=; b=ljoQ8gPF8e1rm+P3Okb39DvfgtKyjU6T3yVr23ghk07RujdG3n+2DySPHfJCDFN+mx vvBkz4ij0ICYEPgadhBrRk3/26148Gj/CvpagAorCkKewjqLtrQTZ2RHn0PJ9DB/CVTG H4CnIUdBDGcUjG7C4KxyjF9MWQbnh77E5WynbPQm/uhhhomYMnUrOqGnhKUGmhXjT4BH eAaze44MWm/t924b+ifbjD34erdYyo3O6oImkw+MYl+Qu7R47PjmWOJSxk/pGhJqGuBU 2dlSZVHiKI0dpuHegXQME8Laf6PgX20NOxbm498LH1m6e1L4McS6xw1XWkHe+j0YHWiC P1tw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H07vOzBw7R8mB3ycijEFjPNABt5/A3h2T0WuF9f5oxW1hwE1aAMadr2968vqpWjQxfjVHJ8ENsVADy91A== X-Received: by 10.28.27.14 with SMTP id b14mr17216087wmb.50.1490765899498; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:38:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.171.91 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:38:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Pierre Smits Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:38:19 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Vetoes for New Committers?? To: "dev@community.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114b2d56e20e39054bd7fba7 archived-at: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:38:30 -0000 --001a114b2d56e20e39054bd7fba7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 In 2015 I asked a similar quiestion in this same forum. See [1]. I may shed some light. [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a4095177b9630643c8957e91b1e1b977b521db170767eb17eccec9f7@1426899898@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Joseph Schaefer < joe_schaefer@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > The downside to majority rule when it comes to personnel voting is that it > can lead to a situation where a company having a majority on the pmc can > increase their majority by voting in additional employees without the > minority having any way to provide a check on that exercise of power. Yes > this has come up in the past. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:03 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > > > Hi, > > on https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#new-committer-process > it > > describes the process of bringing in a new committer for a "typical > > project". > > > > But in the "Discussion" it speaks of "3 +1 and no vetoes"... Is it really > > "typical" that projects use vetoes for new committers? I can't recall > > seeing that anywhere, not saying it is incorrect, but asking whether it > > really is "typical". > > > > Perhaps we should provide links to a handful of well-known project's > > processes, to both give a template for projects to work with as well as > > different approaches. > > > > Anyone has any opinion on this matter? > > > > Cheers > > -- > > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > > http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org > > --001a114b2d56e20e39054bd7fba7--