xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Lautenbach <be...@ozemail.com.au>
Subject Re: [Fwd: Re: XML PMC and Oversight]
Date Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:40:16 GMT
Matt Sergeant wrote:

> I worry a little that we're changing things that won't help anything. If 
> there's lack of oversight right now, changing the group structure won't 
> help attain more oversight. These are small projects here in XML land, 
> and people only have a finite amount of time to devote to them. Making 
> projects like AxKit the equivalent of a TLP within a cluster of other 
> TLPs won't change the way AxKit is run.

Your last sentence is absolutely spot on the mark.  But it's actually 
the point why the federation might be the right approach.  As I read 
things, many (not all) of the XML projects are actually doing their own 
internal oversite in much the way a PMC is expected to do oversite of a 
TLP.  I.e. reviewing code commits, planning code changes, approving 
releases etc.

The problem is not with what you are doing inside the sub-project, the 
problem is what we are doing inside the PMC to validate it.  Under the 
bylaws it doesn't matter that the sub-project is doing everything 
perfectly.  The PMC has to validate it.  (It's all around legal oversite 
and liability as I understand it.)

So if we make AxKit (for example) a TLP, then you can *almost* keep 
doing things the way you are now.  You would have to appoint a chair and 
PMC of your own (probably just formalising a group you already have) and 
report directly to the board.  Even that we might be able to do as we do 
today - everyone reporting in a combined report once a quarter.

The difference would be that *the right people* - i.e. yourselves - have 
the responsibility of reviewing your own code and releases.  Given you 
are already doing that, it seems like a win-win to me :>.

Other than that - you can change as much as you want.  With the 
federation approach, we can all keep working together (if we so desire) 
within the XML web-site and mailing lists, so nothing changes there, and 
all us little projects can help each other out with this infrastructure 
stuff :>.

> More tuits after you pluck them from the trees might :-)
> Maybe a "Simon Says" system could help. If we want to do a release we 
> have to ask, like asking for a new committer. It sounds kind of anal, 
> but then so are the ASF legal requirements (for a reason - I don't mean 
> "anal" in an insulting way).
> I do admit to not feeling very close to the problems occurring here, so 
> take what I say with a big pinch of salt.

Not at all!  I tend to agree that adding new structures isn't 
necessarily going to solve the problem.  But formalising what we 
currently have might.

Effectively we are simply removing a level of middle-management and 
letting people get on with what it is they want to do.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org

View raw message