incubator-crunch-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Wills <>
Subject Re: graduation charter details
Date Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:30:53 GMT
So my reason for nominating Matthias as the PMC chair was based on two
things. First, I felt that he deserved it and would do a better job of it
than anyone else. Second, and I'm sure I'm going to embarrass him a little
bit by saying this, but I feel that he represents all that is awesome about
the ASF: someone who joins a community around code, make substantial
contributions, and achieve a leadership position in the community through
merit. That is the ASF at its best, and that is exactly what I wanted the
Crunch community to become when we first took the project to the incubator.

At the end of the day, the PMC chair is largely a symbolic thing: the
overall direction for the project is driven by the consensus of the PMC
members. Given that it's symbolic, I think that we should choose someone
who symbolizes the kind of community we aspire to be, and to me, that's
Matthias. That's my argument.

Matthias, I would really like you to accept the chair. That said, if my
argument didn't sway you and you still want to decline, I will take it, if
only so that we can kick off the graduation resolution vote in a timely
fashion. ;-)


On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:35 AM, Josh Wills <> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Gabriel Reid <>wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 8:22 AM, Matthias Friedrich <> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thursday, 2013-01-31, Josh Wills wrote:
>> > > I was planning on using the graduation charter for Apache Flex as a
>> > > baseline for our own vote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > My thought was to include all current committers as the initial
>> members.
>> >
>> > Sounds good to me.
>> >
>> FWIW, this looks good to me too.
>> >
>> > > For the VP/PMC chair role, I was going to nominate Matthias. I am
>> firmly
>> > of
>> > > the opinion that he did more of the important-but-not-fun work that
>> was
>> > > required to turn Crunch into a real Apache project, and I felt like
>> the
>> > > honor of the first VP of Crunch as a TLP should go to him.
>> > >
>> > > With that said, Matthias, I don't want to impose any additional work
>> on
>> > you
>> > > that you wouldn't be up for, so if you would like to decline, I would
>> > > certainly understand.
>> >
>> > I'm flattered, thank you, but I have to decline. It's not about the time
>> > or additional work - I'm definitely willing to help out in
>> organizational
>> > things like graduation or reporting duties, no matter who becomes PMC
>> > chair. However, I think there's a candidate who's much better suited.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure how the nomination/election process works here, or if there
>> > is one, but I'd like to nominate you, Josh. Crunch is your baby, you
>> have
>> > spent more time on it than anybody else - not just coding, but even more
>> > imporantly in building a community. You are always willing to discuss
>> > things, you stay polite even when you disagree and you make compromises
>> > when the majority of the team wants to take a different road. That's
>> > worth a lot, so I think you would be the perfect candidate.
>> >
>> Well, when Josh nominated you (Matthias) for the role, I felt that it was
>> certainly
>> by far the most logical decision, as it feels like you're made to do the
>> job.
>> However, it appears that among your many skills, you're also very good at
>> making a case for Josh to be the PMC Chain :-)
> Seriously. That was a really nice thing to say, Matthias-- thank you. I
> hope you all know how much I enjoy working on this stuff with you. It is
> the part of my work life that I enjoy the most.
> I'm concerned about getting into one of those comical and cliched "you
> take it, no you take it, no you take it" situations, and I just arrived
> back in SF from a long week of travel. I'm going to sleep on it and see if
> I can come up with a good counterargument. :-)
>> I personally feel that either you or Josh would be great for the role, and
>> that's
>> based on all the points that both of you have made about why the other one
>> would be great for the job. As far as I'm concerned, it does need to be
>> one
>> of
>> the two of you, but I'm fine with either one.
>> - Gabriel

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message