Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <5060DF38.3040604@apache.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:31:20 +0200
From: Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111108 Fedora/3.1.16-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.16
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List
References: <505767D9.7060703@oracle.com> <5058D6BC.4040700@apache.org>
 <5058FD04.402@oracle.com>
 <CAKQbXgALaAfue8vAECUxBb2QzU1MVBOhNXgQTfiN4J5czA4qGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <50606E06.3050408@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <50606E06.3050408@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 24/09/2012 J=FCrgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 9/24/12 10:26 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> Just to confirm that I have received no offline nominations.
>
> thanks for this info, it shows that the approach was not so wrong and w=
e
> had no real need for this additional option.

It's still good to have had this option, so we are sure that everybody=20
who wanted to participate in the process had the opportunity to do so.=20
And it's even better that in the end everybody decided to make their=20
nomination in public.

> I am looking forward to Andrew's summary and from my perspective we
> should already start thinking what will be next?

Before moving on with all the steps you listed (and I agree with all of=20
them) we will need to actually see the summary and derive the potential=20
PMC from there. So far I've seen opinions ranging from including only=20
the 10 most popular nominees to including everybody who received at=20
least one nomination. Probably the best solution is somewhere in=20
between, but once we have the summary the situation will probably be=20
clearer.

Regards,
   Andrea.