On 12/3/13 12:34 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>> should do a better job of explaining the details. The way the words are >> currently written, I could just keep saying I want to renew every year >> forever. It should not just be up to me to decide whether to continue, > >As keeps being pointed out to me: once you merit a position in the >Apache hierarchy, you get that position until you resign or until the >PMC/Board strips you of that position. If that goes for committers and >PMC members, it should certainly go for the chair. The way the >guideline is written (chair can stay unless ousted by the PMC) seem to >me to be a reflection of the Apache Way. OK, but how does the PMC "oust" the current chair? We can't require consensus in order to start a vote or else a power-hungry chair would just veto that attempt. I don't think a single PMC member should be able to start a vote either. We don't say what kind of vote is going to be used to select a new chair either. I'm thinking we should try to put some words about this in the guidelines. -Alex
