incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?
Date Mon, 17 Sep 2012 08:24:45 GMT
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Andrew Rist <> wrote:
> I'm not particularly satisfied with current PMC selection process. I think
> the first pass was actually fairly reasonable, and fairly quickly resulted
> in a list that contains the people who are serious about the project.
> Unfortunately, we haven't been able to find consensus on the next step.  I'd

Just a quick observation.  We're hitting some classic bike shedding.
Selecting a PMC is something that everyone feels competent to comment
on and have an opinion about.  Therefore, everyone does have an
opinion and posts their opinion.  I'm as guilty as the next person.
This leads to a form of analysis paralysis and stagnation.  We have
half a dozen or more variations on selection methods that probably
will yield approximately the same thing in the end.  Maybe fine
distinctions, but not critical ones.

One way to escape this is for someone (anyone) to make a concrete
proposal and push it forward.  In other words, seek lazy consensus and
carry it out.  That will reveal if there are any substantive
objections to a proposal versus endless discussions on variations and
alternatives that have no greater degree of support.

In any case, I'd have no objections to your proposed method.  But I do
fear it will languish unless pushed forward with more vigor. And I'd
urge others to support whatever reasonable proposal comes along rather
than continuing to bike shed on alternatives that are slightly
different, but probably no better.  Weigh the benefits of progressing
on this against the microscopic incremental gains that we'll see by
continuing discussion on voting/selection methods.



> like to propose a different way to look at this which may lead us to a
> better way to move forward.   I think we can avoid the need to organize the
> next step around '-1' (i.e. speaking out against potential PMC members -
> discussions around who to leave off), and instead create an affirmative
> process where we identify who we want on.
> What is a good Project Management Committee?
> Here's my start (please expand on this):
>  * Representative of the diversity of tasks in the community
>    (developers, web/wiki/forum, translators, testers, UX, release,
>    marketing, press, ecosystem, infrastructure)
>  * Representative of the geographical diversity in the community
>  * Made up of the most involved members of the community
>  * Able and Competent to perform required ASF functions (overseeing
>    releases and developing the community)
>  * Represents the community in the best possible light
> While on one hand I understand why so many of us want to be on the PMC, a
> large PMC is not necessarily in the best interest of the project.   The PMC
> should not be making decisions about the direction of the project and on who
> gets to do what - the PMC should be mostly involved with voting in new
> committers and approving releases.  The direction of the project should be
> determined on ooo-dev, and by the people who are active in the parts of the
> community listed above.
> My Proposal for the next step in the PMC selection process:
> I suggest that each of us provide up to 10 names for the PMC.  no
> spreadsheet - no voting - no '-1s' for now.  Just an affirmative list of the
> 10 people you think should be doing the work of the PMC.  (the list of names
> we have produced so far is a great place to start for your list, but it is
> not exclusive) Anyone can play! PPMC members, committers, the community.
> Next we use this to produce a list of the group getting the most votes.
> (using PPMC and committer lists as more binding)   We can use this to
> produce the next pass at the proposed PMC roster, hopefully a PMC of around
> 20 members.
> Andrew

View raw message