incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: To vote or not to vote
Date Sat, 09 Jun 2007 00:16:45 GMT
Craig Russell wrote:

> 1. On acceptance of a candidate project, the assigned Mentors shall
> be given access to the Podling's repository for the duration of the
> incubation process. This is to allow the Mentors to perform their
> incubation duties, and is for administrative purposes only.

All PMC members.  We do PMC oversight, the only recognized form in the ASF
bylaws.

> 2. The Mentors form the initial podling PPMC

That would be a task they have to undertake, not a right, although we have
since modified that by vote after much discussion so that the Incubator
PMC votes on the initial PPMC rather than have the Mentors bootstrap it.

> and are subscribed to the podling private email list. Incubator PMC
> members who are Apache members can review the archives but can't post
> to the private list without being moderated.

That text needs to be fixed.  Incubator PMC members are not obligated to
subscribe unless they are Mentors, but have every right to do so in
performing their role as a PMC member.  The rest of that should be deemed
to apply only to non-PMC members who are ASF members (and have not yet
chosen to exercise their right to PMC membership).

> > We don't use Lazy Consensus to accept a podling, we use mandatory
> > majority approval (in HTTP Server terms, q.v.,
> > http://httpd.apache.org/dev/guidelines.html).

> I just read the Policy again, and it sure appears that acceptance of
> a podling by the Incubator is a lazy approval process. No vote occurs
> unless an incubator PMC member says hold.

Read it again:

> Upon a successful result, the PMC Chair of the Sponsor SHOULD request
> the Incubator PMC take on the Candidate as a new Podling.

The only time we don't vote is when another PMC has voted to sponsor a
podling for Incubation, which is what the above sentence describes.
Otherwise we must vote.

> I'm mostly responding to the situation here in which the PPMC was not
> functioning and needed a jump-start [1]. No one seemed to know how to
> get it to start. Noel's suggestion that the PPMC vote new members [2]
> didn't work because Dims was the only active PPMC member, and it's
> hard to claim consensus if there is only one voice.

We subsequently changed the bootstrap process.  I'd have to go back to the
archives, but late October 2006, I believe.  You ought to know, you voted
for it.  :-)  By the way, that also addresses the question you asked a
while back about initial PPMC.  As I mentioned in that earlier thread, it
appears that the decision isn't reflected in the current texts.

As for Ode, I'd prefer to have that in a separate thread, but I think that
there was a series of issues.  It really should have been addressed way
back in March -- 2006.  And failing that, it should have shown up in the
quarterly reports.  But this little issue aside, it appears that the Ode
community in general is a success.

	--- Noel

Mime
View raw message