With all of that said, then I'm a: +1 (binding). -Rob
> On Jun 12, 2016, at 9:27 PM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:10 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Procedurally speaking, I see no reason for this community to hold any >> vote at all. >> >> If a small group of people, including a foundation member or two, >> wants to ask the board to establish a TLP, they may, by writing a >> coherent proposal to the board explaining the situation. The board >> might ask for a filled-in incubator proposal as input to their >> deliberations. >> >> Or, of they wish to go into the incubator to try to build a viable >> community that will get TLP status in time, they can write an >> incubator proposal. >> >> The board or IPMC might wonder about the state of affairs here when >> they receive one of these proposals, but it's hardly a matter that >> calls for a formal vote here. > > Yes, I agree, but the discussion to gather those people together needs to > take place somewhere and since here its been framed as a vote, then it > would be good if those people who want to participate in a TLP effort would > do so in this thread. > > Niall > > > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Niall Pemberton > <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> >> wrote: >> >>>> On Sun, 12 Jun 2016 14:33:58 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >>>> >>>> -1 (non-binding) >>>> >>>> Reason for objection: >>>> >>>> I think the framing of this vote is confusing. >>>> >>>> 1. There appears to be less ability to go to TLP than there was at >>>> the time the previous motion passed. >>>> >>>> 2. The discussion (but not the [VOTE]) speaks of going to TLP via >>>> the incubator. It has to be one or the other. Propose a podling to >>>> Incubator or propose a TLP to the Board. There is no assurance that a >>>> podling will graduate and it doesn't fit to make that a condition. >>>> One could raise the special circumstances at general-incubator, but I >>>> think that works best with something specific (but malleable) in hand. >>>> >>>> 3. The Incubator is reluctant to start podlings from scratch, as >>>> Niall observes. >>> >>> Could you please expand on how 3 Commons PMC members and 3 would-be >>> contributors are assimilated to "scratch"? >> >> It would be good if all those wanting to be part of a Math TLP could >> indicate that here and cast a vote for a Math TLP. Including yourself >> Gilles, since so far I don't remember seeing whether you that you were in >> favour of this. >> >> Niall >> >> >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Gilles >>> >>> >>> 4. It seems to me that the best first-step on whether incubation is >>>> feasible is to do the work to create an incubation proposal. This >>>> will require certain key factors to be addressed. Not the least is >>>> how the code base will be imported and, because it is from an Apache >>>> Project, how it will be left behind too. That definition can start >>>> here and then be refined on the general-incubator list where one will >>>> need to find a champion (perhaps), mentors, and a sufficient body of >>>> initial committers. It is important for those who would form the >>>> initial core for a podling to learn enough about how incubation works. >>>> >>>> - Dennis >>>> >>>> Disclosure: >>>> >>>> I have no idea how this might go. I am not a Commons Math >>>> subject-matter expert, even though computational mathematics has some >>>> appeal for me. I still have my bound "Collect Algorithms from ACM, >>>> Volume 1: Algorithms 1-220." I did not hold onto the microfiche of >>>> later algorithms that were published in conjunction with the ACM >>>> Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS). The latest (Algorithm >>>> 959) is interesting although I have no idea where to find the code and >>>> am dismayed that it is a library under the GPL. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Niall Pemberton [mailto:niall.pember...@gmail.com] >>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2016 11:56 >>>>> To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Move Commons Math to TLP (again)... >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 10:39 AM, James Carman >>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We would take math through the incubator in order to build community >>>>> around >>>>>> it first. If we fail to do so, then we can decide its fate at that >>>>> time. We >>>>>> haven't done a good job attracting new people to math here at all. It >>>>> has >>>>>> always been maintained primarily by a select few. >>>>> >>>>> It made sense to me when there were 6 committers working on Math, but I >>>>> think given the exodus of most of those people to hipparchus then it >>>>> would >>>>> be better to wait a while for the dust to settle to see what happens >>>>> with >>>>> Math. >>>>> >>>>> I also don't think the incubator is a good place for starting a >>>>> community >>>>> from scratch (i.e. one or two man projects) - if you have a nucleus of >>>>> at >>>>> least a few people, then it has much better chance of success. >>>>> >>>>> So for me, I'm -1 unless there are enough Mathematicians who want to >>>>> work >>>>> on the code to give it a chance as an incubator project. >>>>> >>>>> Niall >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 1:36 AM Ralph Goers >>>>> <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> -1 (binding) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At least until there are enough people to have a viable PMC. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 10, 2016, at 8:47 PM, James Carman >>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Since it has been suggested that the previously passing vote >>>>> should be >>>>>>>> voided, I propose we vote again to move Commons Math to a TLP: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 - Yes, move Commons Math to a TLP >>>>>>>> -1 - No, do not move Commons Math to a TLP >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The vote will remain open for 72 hours. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> James Carman > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> - >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
