incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: an experiment
Date Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:31:54 GMT
----- Original Message ----

> From: Craig L Russell <>
> To:
> Sent: Thu, August 12, 2010 2:21:44 PM
> Subject: Re: an experiment
> On Aug 11, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> > The first idea  should be fairly straightforward: that for
> > the projects I participate in  (so far thrift and sis), that
> > the IPMC delegates to the PPMC the  decision-making process
> > for voting in new committers: basically rolling  back the clock
> > to May 1, 2007 on guides/ppmc.html.
> > 
> Before we  set ourselves up for disappointment based on
> unrealistic expectations, this  proposal is fairly modest.
> Here's the current process for getting new committers  into an incubating 
> 1. Identify candidates
> 2. Discuss  candidates on podling-private
> 3. Agree that candidate should be a  committer
> 4. Vote on podling-private
> 5. Wait for everyone's vote
> 6.  Inform incubator PMC of results of vote
> 7. Vote in incubator PMC if not all  three mentors have voted
> 8. Invite committer
> 9. Send ICLA
> 10. Wait for  ICLA registration
> 11. Send root request for committer
> 12. Wait for root to  create account
> 13. Update asf authorization file for new account
> 14.  Done
> All this proposal does is to eliminate step 7 in the case where the  Mentors 
>are AWOL.

As Justin points out there is also a pre-notification step
in the current process that would also go away, but yes that
is the gist of it.

> That said, I support the idea behind this modest  proposal,
> and just need to see the details (several modifications
> have been  proposed). Infra also needs to support this
> proposal, as the main reason for  item 7 is to get root to
> recognize that the incubator PMC has taken official  action
> (three votes in favor of a new committer) which has been
> an  infrastructure requirement (also part of the details).

As the infra person who has created each and every account
in this org over the past 4 years, I think I can safely
speak to infra's interest in this issue.  root@ only looks
that the account request has been cc'd to all the proper
lists and expects those lists to ensure proper procedure
has been followed for the request.  root@ maintains a few
days delay between receipt of an acct request and action
on it in order to allow for effective oversight.


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

View raw message