Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy)
From: Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org>
Reply-To: dkulp@apache.org
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Incubator new committer redux
Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2007 14:34:59 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5
References: <9A4D5ACE-110D-4838-A645-4925104B6326@SUN.com>
In-Reply-To: <9A4D5ACE-110D-4838-A645-4925104B6326@SUN.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200707011434.59523.dkulp@apache.org>

On Saturday 30 June 2007 17:56, Craig L Russell wrote:
> The thread has died down with no consensus, so I'm going to try again.
>
> Regarding how a Podling can get a "new to Apache" committer. First,
> the rules:
>
> 1. Only the Incubator PMC can vote in a new committer, with three +1
> and no -1 votes recorded.

I thought -1 votes are only vetos on code modification votes:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

"Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule 
unless otherwise stated. That is, if there are more favourable votes 
than unfavourable ones, the issue is considered to have passed -- 
regardless of the number of votes in each category."

I'd definitely prefer not having "vetos" on committer votes.   Not that I 
ever expect this to happen, but if a particular IPMC person has an 
EXTREME dislike for a potential committer, with a VETO vote, they could 
block an otherwise good contributor.

That, and votes in the IPMC/Incutabor should be the same as votes 
elsewhere in Apache.   If -1 aren't veto's elsewhere, they shouldn't be 
here either.

That's my non-binding $0.02. 

Dan


>
> 2. All Incubator PMC members should be able to participate in the
> vote if they choose to.
>
> 3. The Podling PMC should be learning how to govern the project,
> meaning that they should practice how to vote.
>
> I think we have agreed that the [DISCUSS] of a new committer can
> happen on the Podling PMC private list and the discussion can be
> summarized by the Mentors to the Incubator PMC private list. The
> issue is how to organize the binding vote.
>
> I think we have two proposals on the table that are practical.
>
> 1. The [VOTE] thread runs simultaneously on both the IPMC and PPMC
> private lists, and all voting occurs simultaneously on both lists.
>
> 2. The [VOTE] thread runs first on the PPMC private list (not
> binding) and then on the IPMC private list (binding) and the Mentors
> provide feedback in both directions.
>
> Have I missed any?
>
> Craig Russell
> DB PMC, OpenJPA PMC
> clr@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo

-- 
J. Daniel Kulp
Principal Engineer
IONA
P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194
daniel.kulp@iona.com
http://www.dankulp.com/blog

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