Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D1B09756 for ; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 19:45:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 21620 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2012 19:45:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 21456 invoked by uid 500); 6 Feb 2012 19:45:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 21448 invoked by uid 99); 6 Feb 2012 19:45:05 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:45:05 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [64.202.165.37] (HELO smtpauth13.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net) (64.202.165.37) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:44:58 +0000 Received: (qmail 27622 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2012 19:44:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (76.252.112.72) by smtpauth13.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.37) with ESMTP; 06 Feb 2012 19:44:35 -0000 Message-ID: <4F302D9D.7050607@rowe-clan.net> Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:44:29 -0600 From: "William A. Rowe Jr." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: PMC chair vs. reorg proposals References: <4F2ED704.6080609@rowe-clan.net> <4F3020B3.10609@apache.org> <4F30269F.3040000@rowe-clan.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2/6/2012 1:33 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > Bill has also been the most vehement opponent of one of the > possible evolutionary strategies: to elect people to the PMC on the > strength (only) of their ability and willingness to supervise single > podlings. Let's be clear, it wasn't an election to a PMC, but to the IPMC that I opposed. Members of the IPMC have a vote on ALL podlings, whether they earned merit there or not. It is a very confusing message for new valued contributors. And it wasn't their ability and willingness to supervise a podling, but on the fact that they had successfully RM'ed a release [reading all the docs and rules along the way]. There is an impedance mismatch between serving a PMC and the IPMC. Please don't mis-characterize what I concur or disagree with. We'll be far more likely to come to consensus if you [collectively] quit doing so, and quit relying on ad hominem attacks. It's especially important for a potential committee chair, since the important parts of your writings are potentially dismissed. Otherwise, thank you for responding to my RFC. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org