I very much like the government model that the ASF board operates on. It does not meddle in PMC decisions. If the board does not like the way some project is operating - it typically has only one rather blunt instrument to use: disband the PMC. This has the nice side benefit as it encourages the use of diplomacy over force as typically the only way a vote to disband a PMC would pass is if it presented a clear and present danger to the ASF.
So has the board ever been pleased with the way the incubator is running
things?
You're on the board Sam, are you still pleased with your decision to support the incubator?
Does what I envisioned and what I voted for exactly match what I see executing in practice? No. That's not surprising, as very few of us can predict the future with unerring accuracy.
Does the incubator PMC present a clear and present danger to the ASF. No.
What I envisioned was more of a central clearing house for legal pedigree of donations, coupled with a set of eager ambassadors to go out and observe and participate in fledgling projects in situo. Those are goals I still very much believe in. And the PPMC proposal goes a long way towards addressing this.
Put in tangible terms, I would much prefer to see a incubator puruse a vote of [no] confidence in the Geronimo PPC than to have the incubator continue to debate the name of the project.
- Sam Ruby
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
