incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Roy T. Fielding" <>
Subject Re: svn commit: r178965 - /incubator/public/trunk/site-author/learn/newcommitters.html
Date Thu, 07 Jul 2005 10:55:21 GMT
On Jul 6, 2005, at 5:21 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> I think I prefer the private vote, acceptance by the candidate,
> followed by a public announcement.  Or else a pro forma vote
> which explicitly states 'only PMC members can vote.'  (Which I
> don't think is a particularly community-building approach.)
> I think this is a particularly likely scenario when the
> voters-who-count != the project committers -- i.e., where the
> PMC != the committers.  Those non-on-the-PMC committers are probably
> going to feel that their votes should count -- but they won't.

Well, now, whose fault is that?  People who have the right to vote
on a project had better be on the private list, since otherwise
they won't be informed.  I don't believe we should have PMC
lists (only dev and private), which is why your scenario doesn't
apply in my model of how a project works.  In my model, the only
time that PMC != committers is when a given person is provided
commit access for a specific purpose and they should be informed
of those limitations at that time.

I understand the concerns, but I still feel that project decisions
should always be made in public.  How about if the vote takes place
in private and the announcement includes the final vote naming
those who voted?


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message