The segment (see below)t in the request for graduation to the board is a remnant of an idea that is brought forward by many project in incubation.
> RESOLVED, that the initial Apache NAME PMC be and hereby is > tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws intended to > encourage open development and increased participation in the > Apache NAME Project; and be it further It is something that keeps getting in without any consideration regarding its impact. Not only within the graduating project, but also within the IPMC or the board. If it is in and ratified through a majority vote (first by the IPMC, subsequently) by the board it brings forward 2 actions: 1. the newly established must take actions on defining, approving (and maintaining), publishing bylaws, and 2. the board must see to it that it will be done. In threads elsewhere I have questioned this, and my take-away from postings by several (ex) board members is that it is of no importance, no need to follow through, no desire to police. Seeing that there is no desire among others to address this,I have stopped bringing this issue forward in (recent) vote-for-graduation requests in general@incubator.a.o. Best regards, Pierre Smits ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> OFBiz based solutions & services OFBiz Extensions Marketplace http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: > In 2015 I asked a similar quiestion in this same forum. See [1]. I may > shed some light. > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a4095177b9630643c8957e91b1e1b9 > 77b521db170767eb17eccec9f7@1426899898@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E > > Best regards, > > Pierre Smits > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > OFBiz based solutions & services > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Joseph Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com. > invalid> wrote: > >> The downside to majority rule when it comes to personnel voting is that >> it can lead to a situation where a company having a majority on the pmc can >> increase their majority by voting in additional employees without the >> minority having any way to provide a check on that exercise of power. Yes >> this has come up in the past. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:03 PM, Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > on https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#new-committer-process >> it >> > describes the process of bringing in a new committer for a "typical >> > project". >> > >> > But in the "Discussion" it speaks of "3 +1 and no vetoes"... Is it >> really >> > "typical" that projects use vetoes for new committers? I can't recall >> > seeing that anywhere, not saying it is incorrect, but asking whether it >> > really is "typical". >> > >> > Perhaps we should provide links to a handful of well-known project's >> > processes, to both give a template for projects to work with as well as >> > different approaches. >> > >> > Anyone has any opinion on this matter? >> > >> > Cheers >> > -- >> > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer >> > http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org >> >> >
