incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject Re: Vote on personal matters: majority vote vs consensus
Date Mon, 25 Mar 2013 08:36:02 GMT


On Mon, Mar 25, 2013, at 07:52 AM, ant elder wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier
> <grobmeier@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > following a thread on private@, I would like to bring the discussion
> > on how we vote on nominated IPMC members.
> >
> > We had the case were one person was nominated and received three +1.
> > Another voter had concerns an voted -1. The vote has been marked as
> > failed, because no consensus could be found.
> >
> > Now this was my understanding and I was surprised that the vote failed:
> >
> > "Votes on procedural issues follow the common format of majority rule
> > unless otherwise stated."
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >
> > Joe brought this up before around 14 months:
> > http://s.apache.org/majorityinipmc
> >
> > We have not found a consens, but one might highlight Roy Fieldings e-mail:
> > http://s.apache.org/royCommitterVeto
> >
> > I still think like Joe and feel that consensus should not apply in the
> > IPMC. We are way to different to normal PMCs. As IPMC members we have
> > no code which we can veto. Its all about accepting podlings,
> > discussing rules and mentoring.
> >
> > We also have 172 IPMC members to date (according committer index).
> > Most of the people are not seen often; we have many awol mentors.
> > Currently becoming an IPMC member is necessary to become a Mentor. It
> > always felt wrong to me. I think one should be able to become a Mentor
> > and finally be able to join the IPMC and discuss rules, when he has
> > shown merit.
> >
> > With an IPMC of that size it becomes more and more easy to get a -1.
> >
> > Personally I would like to see the IPMC separating IPMC-ship and
> > Mentor-ship. I have proposed this already, but it seems nobody else
> > except me wants that. So I am proposing now to reconsider Joes
> > original proposal and change our community voting to a majority voting
> > unless we restructure the IPMC.
> >
> > I am sorry to bring this lengthy discussion up again, but from the
> > original thread I have learned a couple of other IPMC members are
> > thinking similar on majority / consensus.
> >
> > I would also like to suggest that this time we finish the discussion
> > with a vote.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Christian
> >
> 
> A concern with changing to majority votes instead of consensus is that
> it will get misunderstood and at some point someone will think its ok
> to do that in other projects too.
> 
> Your second suggestion sounds like the thing to do to me - separating
> IPMC-ship and Mentor-ship - that would solve several of the problems
> we've being having including this one, it would open up a much bigger
> pool of potential mentors, and IPMC'ers would get much more visibility
> of people as they work here which should make the PMC voting easier.

The structural problem here is that at the ASF, it is only PMC members
whose votes are binding. Without being on the incubator PMC, votes on
releases are non-binding.

Now, you might argue that mentoring is a lot more than voting, but we
could create another bottleneck in getting release votes through,
requiring votes from incubator PMC members who are not particularly
focused on the podling.

Solve that, and the idea has merit in my eyes.

Upayavira

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


Mime
View raw message