flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [DRAFT] Apache Flex December 2013 Report
Date Tue, 03 Dec 2013 08:04:30 GMT

On 12/2/13 11:46 PM, "Erik de Bruin" <erik@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:

>> me to be a good place to state that. When putting the guidelines
>>together consensus was that the chair should
>> be for a year or reviewed every year.
>When I voted I took the guideline to mean: for at least a year and
>automatically extended by a year if the chair chose to stay on, unless
>the PMC took a vote to replace him/her.
And that's why I mentioned that I think this wording needs fixing.  It
should do a better job of explaining the details.  The way the words are
currently written, I could just keep saying I want to renew every year
forever.  It should not just be up to me to decide whether to continue,
the rest of the PMC should have a say.

The Ant guidelines say: "The PMC may consider the position of PMC chair
annually and if supported by 2/3 Majority may recommend a new chair to the
board" but doesn't really say how they decide who to recommend (also 2/3
or consensus?).  We don't say that either, but I think it should be
consensus minus the candidates?

Anyway, my work day is over.  If others agree the words need fixing I'll
propose some ideas in a new thread tomorrow.


View raw message