Mailing-List: contact general-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org
Message-ID: <3AAA04E2.C436406F@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 11:41:38 +0100
From: Martin Stricker <shugal@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: general@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Volunteers: FINAL Cut?
References: <OF47B3F1F5.F7567945-ON85256A0A.00600B97@raleigh.ibm.com>
 <3.0.6.32.20010309185336.00803100@chebucto.ns.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Arved Sandstrom schrieb:
> (1) the bootstrap PMC of ~5 folks, cogently described above; or
> 
> (2) going directly to the representative PMC.
> 
> I think we have some momentum for (2). Also, a central function of the
> "small" PMC was going to be growth, and so (2) is where we figured on
> ending up anyway.
> 
> Personal preference: every active subproject gets 1 rep. I understand
> from Arnaud that Crimson is inactive. Considering the C/C++/Perl
> projects to be different enough to merit a separate rep gives us that
> injection of non-Java, so I think it's a good idea.
> 
> Finally, I don't think that this representative PMC will be too big
> for the occasional legal or adminstrative decisions that have to be
> made.

I disagree. I'd rather do the 5-people-PMC and have an additional
working group (and more working groups as seem necessary) with one
representant of each alive (sub)project. The charter of the PMC should
be as limited as possible: It's allowed *only* as much responsibility as
the ASF charter dictates. Everything else should be done by the
representative group. Furtermore there should be an open mailing list
for the PMC and the Projects group for curious non-committers like me
;-)). I assume most commiters are happy if they haven't headaches about
legal issues, and all others can participate in the mailing list. A
small PMC is able to react very quickly if necessary.

In the various projects i was involved in as a programmer at work I
found out a cascading chain of small working groups is far more
efficient than one big group containing all relevant people and offices
at once. I suggest a PMC of 5 people *only* for the necessary
administrative and legal work, while the technical issues are handled by
the representative working group with one representative  from each
alive subproject. How these subprojects coordinate their respective
project should be left to this project alone, and the representative
from the project will represent the consensus from his/her project to
the representative working group. This should be the most effective way
to handle things. And all discussion (as far as possible) should be done
in public through mailing lists like this one so even non-committers can
provide input.

Best regards,
Martin Stricker

---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org