On Tuesday, March 24, 2015, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com > <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > > <bdelacre...@apache.org <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Jacques Le Roux > > > <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > > >> Who will update the https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html > > page?* > > > > > > I've done that, it now says "In general, committer elections are > > > majority approval votes, as described on the Apache Voting Process > > > page" with a link. > > > > That's not my understanding. It's not what I've heard from the Board > > over the years, particularly from Greg. And I believe that it's for a > > very good reason that personnel votes at Apache are not majority rule: > > majority rule forces a result rather than creates consensus. > > > > I dislike all voting, yes. Consensus through discussion is definitely a > better approach. > > Concretely: I don't think there is any specific recommendation for how a > PMC/community decides upon new committers. I've seen many mechanisms. In > fact, within Apache Subversion, a committer can be added by any *singular* > PMC member, no vote required (but their resulting commit rights are > limited).
Just for my understanding, does subversion have 2 types of committer one with the full subversion repo bit, and another limited (to part of the repo) ? rgds jan i > > For PMC Members, Roy has stated [on general@incubator, on 1/31/2012] that: > > "Well, it boils down to the fact that making someone a PMC member gives > them veto power over the changes you make. The only way that works > socially is if everyone currently on the PMC agrees that person is a peer." > > >... > > Cheers, > -g > -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
