incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Louis Suárez-Potts <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
Date Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:18:13 GMT

On 12-09-19, at 10:29 , "Dennis E. Hamilton" <> wrote:

> -1 
> This procedure lacks transparency and accountability.  It is incompatible with how project
governance is accomplished.
> My recommendation is that those who have some reason to require anonymity with regard
to their nominations (that is what it is, individuals are asked to make 10 nominations) should
send their nominations to ooo-private@
> The subject should contain "[PMC] Proposed PMC List" and it should not contain any discussion.
 These are simply nominations.  The moderators of ooo-private will accept those posts from
all sources.
> When the compilation of nominations is prepared, *all* submitters of nominations will
be identified in a list as confirmation that their nominations were included.  There should
be no identification of who has nominated a particular individual.  Only the number of nominations
for any nominated individual should be reported.
> It would be useful to have the report double-checked by one or more PPMC members to ensure
that noone's nominations were overlooked or double counted.  (On duplicate nominations, the
usual rule is to use the latest one received.)

I agree with Dennis' comments and suggest that we not use the list for nominations (top ten
list) but rather for notice of a live list at a wiki that can be made more transparent. The
point is that the list via email becomes sedimented, so that the most recent agreements stay
surface, the logic buried, and this sedimentation eliminates the real nature of the PMC dynamic.

> - Dennis
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Rist [] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 16:00
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
> (top posting after private messages - I cannot describe the shame I 
> feel...  ;-)
> I have an option that I believe will handle Andrea's concerns.  I have 
> spoken with Ross and he is amenable to receiving Proposed PMC entries 
> off list.
> If anyone is concerned about sending their list to ooo-dev, you can send 
> it to Ross ( rgardler at apache) instead, and at the end of the period 
> (next Sunday), he will send an anonymized summary of the votes he has 
> received, along with a breakdown of submissions by committers/PPMC vs 
> other community members.
> We have received lists from 10 people and have 25 nominees with multiple 
> votes.  It would be great to get even more feedback.
> A.
> On 9/18/2012 1:17 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> On 17/09/2012 Andrew Rist wrote:
>>> * This is not a vote. This is a search for consensus. Please no '-1'
>>> replies. Let's see what this process produces, and then discuss
>>> from there.
>> It seems that the process is working quite well, and that we are on 
>> the right way to bootstrap a PMC by consensus.
>> I surely don't want to block the current process, but I wonder if 
>> allowing people to "vote" (actually, express preferences) anonymously 
>> would be better for some volunteers/cultures. Our mentors have often 
>> stated that we have secure voting solutions available, but maybe this 
>> is overkill and time-consuming, and it would be enough to allow people 
>> to send their lists to a mentor (if available), who would repost them 
>> here.
>> It is not an issue that I feel personally: it's OK for me to continue 
>> with public messages on ooo-dev. But it could be that others have 
>> problems, and in that case I'd encourage them to speak up so that we 
>> can find a way to ensure that everyone can express their opinions.
>> Regards,
>>  Andrea.

View raw message