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 10:46:30 GMT
Glen Mazza wrote:
> --- Berin Lautenbach <berin@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>Would also be interested in whether people have been
>>following the idea 
>>of PPMCs in the Incubator.  
> Couldn't find the thread--what does the PPMC acronym
> stand for?  Also, are the specific oversight
> requirements of Apache board available online
> somewhere?  It might be easier to determine the
> correct path to go once everyone is aware of what
> needs to be done.  

PPMC = Practice PMC.  Basically the group that will become the PMC when 
the project comes out of incubation.

>>In essence, each
>>sub-project has it's own 
>>PMC (the PPMC) which is made up of the key players
>>in the sub-project. 
> But wasn't the Apache board's original concern that a
> subproject's committers, by themselves, are not
> sufficient to ensure quality of work?  We should be
> careful that a subset of the same people, even if they
> are the "key players", will alleviate those concerns. 

No - very important point!  The board's concern was that the PMC, the 
legally responsible entity, wasn't doing enough to ensure the quality of 
the work.  There was never a comment in any way on how well the 
individual sub-projects were doing quality control.

So it may that each project is doing everything perfectly.  We just have 
to find a way to either get that level of visibility in the PMC or 
remove the middle layer that is adding no value and give each 
sub-project the ability to drive its own destiny (as they are doing 
already :>).

>>Also in the PPMC are all the members of the PMC. 
>>The latter are there 
>>purely to provide oversite - i.e. ensure that
>>decisions are being made 
>>appropriately and in the Apache style.
> But I thought the reason for moving to subproject
> PPMC's to begin with was that the XML PMC members did
> *not* have the time to do subproject oversight at the
> granularity that the Apache board wanted.  
> How will available time for the XML PMC members to do
> this oversight work materialize as a result of them
> joining the PPMCs?  

A fair call - and my main niggle with this approach for XML.

> My general caution would be that XML Apache should be
> careful not to make any organizational changes if
> those changes won't satisfy the board's needs.  In
> particular, if the requirements are simply too
> time-consuming no matter how you restructure things,
> it would probably be better to work on that problem
> first before considering PPMC's.

Yup.  It's why I'm leaning more towards the federation idea.  Each 
project just does what it does today, but does so within the framework 
of the foundation.


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

View raw message