geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Davanum Srinivas <d...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [vote] Process for adding committers
Date Wed, 10 Sep 2003 17:32:46 GMT
and once geronimo has a critical mass, regular processes can be used.
-- dims

--- Davanum Srinivas <dims@yahoo.com> wrote:
> yep. the problem i was trying to tackle was that no one had an idea what was going to
happen and
> when. 
> 
> -- dims
> 
> --- Alex Blewitt <Alex.Blewitt@ioshq.com> wrote:
> > Surely the basic ideas are the same, though? They are following ASF 
> > procedures; the only difference proposed by Davanum is that to 
> > kick-start the process off, rather than waiting for the committers to 
> > propose people, a number of people step forward in that week and then 
> > block voting occurs. The only difference is kick-starting the list of 
> > proposed committers.
> > 
> > Alex.
> > 
> > On Wednesday, Sep 10, 2003, at 18:21 Europe/London, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
> > 
> > > With two options on the table, I think we need to put this to bed 
> > > quickly so
> > > I am calling for a vote between the two following options:
> > >
> > > Option #1 from Davanum Srinivas:
> > >    Step #1: 1 week of Nominations.
> > >             Existing committers can nominate new committers by
> > >             sending a note to the dev mailing list.
> > >    Step #2: One of the ASF sponsors consolidates the list of
> > >             nominations and starts a VOTE on the dev
> > >             mailing list. VOTE is open for 1 week.
> > >             Existing committers can use +1/+0/-0/-1 to indicate
> > >             their preference in an email to the dev mailing list.
> > >    Step #3: ASF sponsor conveys the result of the VOTE to the
> > >             incubator PMC and asks for permission to add the new
> > >             committers.
> > >
> > > Option #2 from Ryan Ackley:
> > >    Step #1: Any committer can propose someone as a committer at
> > >             any time. The proposing committer generally lists
> > >             their contributions and why they should be made a
> > >             committer.
> > >    Step #2: Any current committer can vote on the new committer.
> > >             The vote is open for 3 days and requires consensus
> > >             ( three +1's and no -1's) as per
> > >             http://incubator.apache.org/drafts/voting.html
> > >             (note this is a different link than Ryan's original)
> > >    Step #3: A positive result is handled as per
> > >             http://incubator.apache.org/drafts/newcommitters.html
> > >
> > > We go with whichever option gets the highest score after three days 
> > > (+1's
> > > less -1's) unless the outcome is obvious.
> > >
> > > My vote:
> > > Option #1:
> > >     -0 jboynes - I think we should use a standard process from the
> > >                  beginning for all committers rather than a custom one
> > >
> > > Option #2:
> > >     +1 jboynes - It's the normal process
> > >
> > 
> 
> 
> =====
> Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/


=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/

Mime
View raw message