geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Bartel <>
Subject Re: [vote] Process for adding committers
Date Fri, 12 Sep 2003 02:15:25 GMT
Well, my ISP has had my email off the air for a day or two, so I wasn't 
able to read this sooner.

My vote goes with the standard Apache way of doing things, which appears 
to be Option #2.

As I think Greg Stein pointed out in another posting (I'm still catching 
up with the list after my email outtage) this project is world wide, 
across many timezones, so we need to make sure there is enough time for 
people to respond to votes etc.


David Blevins wrote:
> Oops, vote's closed -- should have read the whole thread first :)
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 05:23:48PM +0000, David Blevins wrote:
>>+1 #Option 2
>>On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 10:21:21AM -0700, 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
>>>            (note this is a different link than Ryan's original)
>>>   Step #3: A positive result is handled as per
>>>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

View raw message