+1 (binding)
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Prasanna Santhanam < prasanna.santha...@citrix.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 10:29:45AM -0500, Chip Childers wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > We've had some good discussions on the proposed bylaws over the last > > couple of weeks [1], so I'd like to move this forward to a VOTE now. > > Of course, if there are still concerns or discussion points that > > people want to see addressed, we can stop the vote to discuss and edit > > as necessary. > > > > I've made 2 changes from the last draft I sent out. They are as follows: > > > > * Removed from section 3.4.1 (Technical decisions): "The CloudStack > > community will assume that silence represents consensus on a > > proposal." > > * Added to section 2.3.3 (Committers): "...after approval of the PMC." > > > > I'd like us to assume that committer votes are binding for the initial > > establishment of the bylaws. If the proposed bylaws are adopted, the > > PMC will have the binding votes for bylaw changes going forward. > > Until that's established though, committer status seems like the right > > way to be inclusive about this process. Of course, any community > > member has the right to share their opinion via non-binding votes (and > > I'd encourage you to do so). > > > > And now, here's what we're voting on: > > > > I'd like to propose that the Apache CloudStack Project Bylaws > > (included at the bottom of this email message) be adopted by the > > community. > > > > Since this is a critical decision for the community, I'll leave this > > vote thread open for at least a week. > > > > [ ] +1 approve > > [ ] +0 no opinion > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) > > > > For sanity in tallying the vote, can committers please be sure to > > indicate "(binding)" with their vote? > > +1 (binding) > > -- > Prasanna., >
