gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam R. B. Jack" <aj...@trysybase.com>
Subject Re: [RFC] Bylaws
Date Thu, 08 Apr 2004 22:54:06 GMT

> If you have any comments, wish to change anything, please go ahead and
> modify the draft - or discuss stuff here.

Ok, whilst sitting in the dentist's waiting room I was able to read these.
FWIIW: I can now attest that reading bylaws is more fun than having root
canal work. I won't say how much. ;-)

I agree we have a bit of an issue with the committers (and 'active
committers').

Paragraph 2 of 3.2.3 says all Apache committers are Gump committers, so I
think this makes paragraph 3 obsolete. That, unless we explicitly state this
is for Apache newbies (like me ;-).

The voting section does refer to active committers -- a term we've not
defined (but I might like to see defined). Something tells me we ought allow
all (as equal), but respect those who do (as more equal ;-), so 'active
committer' is perhaps anybody who has commit in the last 6 months (to
metadata or code).

The only reason I raise this is that 'active committers' can have binding
vetoes, and I can see that a voting deadlock could occur. I don't see any
way for the PMC to break a deadlock, other than remove committer rights,
which seem lousy brute force. That all said ... what the heck ... I really
don't want to get all lawyer-ish on this. Perhaps we just deal with things
if they ever occur.

FWIIW: I'd probably prefer to vote on folk on the PMC list, but I'm open to
either.

regards,

Adam





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org


Mime
View raw message