incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Juergen Schmidt <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List
Date Wed, 19 Sep 2012 19:42:53 GMT
Am Mittwoch, 19. September 2012 um 21:26 schrieb Kay Schenk:
> On 09/19/2012 10:38 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
> >  
> > On 12-09-19, at 12:09 , Rob Weir <> wrote:
> >  
> > > How would you deal with "opacity here as to how these names were
> > > suggested"? These are individual's stated preferences. Nothing
> > > more, nothing less. Unless we require that everyone give a
> > > complete, detailed justification for every name they pick, what can
> > > we do? A wiki certainly doesn't change that.
> > >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> > It depends on how the wiki is set up. For instance, the header of the
> > wiki could state, as the subject line here does,
> > "Preference/Proposed…." and then go on in one sentence to explain,
> > "the names proposed derive from the overall committer list (or
> > whatever) and are those valued by the individual proposer. The final
> > PMC list itself will likely change as the project evolves and will be
> > composed of those names suggested here." It could then clarify who is
> > able to propose names and stipulate a deadline.
> >  
> > Further, it could clarify that in future, a different process
> > operate, and that this process now is essentially ad hoc to resolve a
> > late-summer slowdown stalemate.
> >  
> > This page could further clarify what other pages do: the point of the
> > PMC.
> >  
> > In this way, a wiki can provide more than a mail list post.
> >  
> > Louis
> Yes, a wiki can provide more than a mail post, but I think this exercise  
> is valid, and provides a convenient way for *anyone* on this list to  
> express an "opinion" without explicitly stating why. I actually think  
> this is a point in the mailing lists favor. This approach is simple and  
> based on impressions of individuals involved with this project. I don't  
> see much wrong with that. Picking "10" has been difficult for all of us,  
> but I did understand that "10" was not a magic number for the final PMC.
> I agree with Juergen that we should complete this circle. I've found it  
> pretty interesting so far.

indeed, some interesting observations.

But more surprising again is the late feedback.

I am trying to give a hint for all who haven't expressed their own opinion yet.  If you don't
have new names that you would like to see on the list, you can abstain or can repeat names
to highlight your agreement on these names. If you feel a name is missing feel free to nominate
10 names with the missing name/names included. It's quite simple, isn't it? We are open for
new names and I believe that people who are really interested in this have followed all the
discussions. It's a one time process to define a PMC, I think well documented and archived
on the mailing list. Nothing that we have to document forever. But anyway if people think
it's necessary, why not.  

> --  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
> "We never sit anything out. We are cups, constantly and quietly
> being filled. The trick is, knowing how to tip ourselves over and
> let the beautiful stuff out."
> -- Ray Bradbury, "Zen in the Art of Writing"

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message