Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of grobmeier@gmail.com designates
 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksohuV=5fxeLb1UDtK1_yzpMpGGi-f9xAO=OpKbcfMhWK_A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5064C859.9090404@oracle.com> <5064CB07.8000101@oracle.com>
 <CAP-ksohuV=5fxeLb1UDtK1_yzpMpGGi-f9xAO=OpKbcfMhWK_A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2012 21:03:23 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAPFNcki7BOt05jm+BU791B5yHpuRWB3o=ny6AkRU-ONL3tWH2w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC Chair
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Andrew Rist <andrew.rist@oracle.com> wrote:
>> I would like to nominate Andrea Pescetti.
>> Andrea is one of the most active and well respected members of the project,
>> and I believe he would make a great PMC Chair.
>>
>
> +1.
>
> It is easy to offend people by actively working on this project.
>
> It is easy not to offend people by doing nothing real.
>
> But to actively contribute to the project, and to avoid offending or
> being offended, this is a talent and a temperament that especially
> recommends Andrea for this position.

Great comment, Rob.

And a great candidate too, me thinks

>
> -Rob
>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/27/2012 2:42 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
>>>
>>> Moving right along...
>>>
>>> I'd like to restart the discussion over choosing a PMC Chair.  The
>>> previous proposed process was discussed in:
>>> http://markmail.org/message/mrgnjtiuum5bovjd
>>> I'd like to take up where that left off.
>>>
>>> Here is the process (with minor modifications) from the original:
>>>
>>>    You can read about the duties of a PMC Chair here:
>>>    http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair
>>>
>>>    1) Nominations would be open for 72 hours.  Anyone can nominate
>>>    someone for the role.  Self-nominations are fine.  And of course
>>>    nominations can be declined.
>>>
>>>    2) If there is only one nomination, then we are done, provided there
>>>    are no sustained objections.
>>>
>>>    3) If there is more than one nomination we discuss on the list for
>>>    another 72 hours.  Discussion would primarily be on ooo-dev, but some
>>>    subjects might be directed to ooo-private.
>>>
>>>    4) If after 72-hours discussion there are still two or more nominees
>>>    then we vote.  Everyone would be welcome to vote, but binding votes
>>>    would be from PPMC members.  If there are more than 2 candidates,
>>>    there will be a run-off vote between the top two nominees if none of
>>>    the nominees receive an outright majority.
>>>
>>>
>>> (note: the last item was changed from the original - nothing more
>>> complicated than a two way run-off is needed, as it is unlikely we have more
>>> than two nominees.)
>>> I think this process is straight forward enough that we should just begin
>>> the process now.
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>


-- 
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de