incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Podling Committer policy
Date Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:16:54 GMT

On Jun 19, 2007, at 1:37 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:

> On 6/7/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>>
>> All very good suggestions.
>>
>> ant elder wrote:
>> >
>> > How about changing it so;
>> >
>> > (1) incubator-private is notified that discussion of a new  
>> committer is
>> > starting on the poddling's private list so IPMCers can  
>> participate in that
>> > discussion;

I think it is difficult for IPMC members to participate in the  
discussion, since in general the only IPMC members who are subscribed  
to the PPMC list are Mentors. And for IPMC members who are not Apache  
Members, it's impossible.

I might be confused; maybe someone can explain how the IPMC  
participates in the discussion on a different private list.
>> >
>> > (2) when the actual vote happens the incubator is notified again  
>> so they can
>> > participate on the poddlings mailing list (ie not voting / 
>> discussing on
>> > incubator-private where the poddling PPMC can't see whats going  
>> on);

See (1).
>> >
>> > (3) the IPMC peoples votes are done by lazy consensus so as long  
>> as there
>> > are enough poddling PPMC votes the vote passes whether or not  
>> there are 3
>> > binding IPMC votes

This contradicts common practice for there to be 3 affirmative votes  
for new committers by the governing PMC (in this case, the IPMC). The  
PPMC has no legal standing, and the act of voting a new committer is  
one of the most important safeguards in the Apache governance policy.

Craig

>> >
>> > (4) the same (1) (2) (3) for a new PPMC member (maybe (3) should  
>> be dropped
>> > for a new PPMC member?)
>>
>> All around +1 - this is a really sane way to handle things.  Pre- 
>> notifying
>> private@incubator gives them their chance to raise issues while  
>> the vote
>> is
>> still going on, and 3 will usually be nothing but an ack.
>
> sounds very reasonable to me as well
>
> - robert

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message