forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] draft Forrest Project Guidelines: Roles and responsibilities
Date Thu, 01 Jul 2004 10:11:31 GMT
Dave Brondsema wrote:

> I am satisfied with the roles and responsibilities, except where they are
> related to moving from one role to another (i.e. voting).  Let's move on
> to discussing those areas.
> From Committers, "After a successful vote,".  A successful vote by whom?
> From PMC, "While they are active, they are part of the PMC".  I think this
> is a little unclear.  Committers can join and disjoin from the PMC
> whenever they want?  Mailing list membership is the indicator of PMC
> membership?  We should also mention what the PMC does when a
> committer joins/disjoins it (from David's recent email: "acking you with
> board@ and adding you to the committee list").  Does that just mean
> approve his/her subscription to the mailing list?  Or is the "committee
> list" something else?

There is a lot of confusion on this :-)

The PMC is the core group of committers of a project, that take 
decisions for the project and maintain it. They live on the *dev* list, 
but have a private list solely for sensitive issues that they can use, 
called the *pmc* list (a better name would be *private*).

The committers are just developers that can commit and participate in 
discussions. By committing code and discussing, they are implicitly 
making day2day decisions for the projece.

The developers are like committers but without commit access: all their 
work goes through patches.

>>>Also, wouldn't it be better just to refer to the main
>>>Apache document for this, and just clarify some points?
>>That might be possible (though that main document needs
>>some enhancements). However most other projects seem
>>to also define the roles in their Guidelines. Another
>>issue is that we are defining an extra role that no other
>>project uses yet.
> What extra role?  I see user, developer, committer, and PMC on our page
> and on the ASF roles page.
> A standalone document is nice, but some more lengthy issue explanations
> (like defining voting) can just be referenced.  And then we specify in our
> document how voting is used for Forrest.

Is there a reason why we can't simply reference these documents and just 
add a section about voting guidelines? If there are things that are not 
ok we can discuss them on

Better yet, I would also add a voting page to the main Apache site that 
explains voting, moving it from the Incubator site.

In this way we have only to decide how the voting has to occur for us, 
and all others are the usual Apache docs.

Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message