Berin,
The issue of how a PMC overseeing a large number of projects should
implement oversight is something of a different issue, however I seem to
recall that Roy commented earlier that a PPMC could be viewed as a PMC
subcommittee, given a responsibility for a particular aspect of that PMC's
oversight. Others aren't overly happy with the idea of subcommittees.
Personally, I don't see how the PMC can scale oversight if every member must
be intimate with every codebase. As we have discussed in Jakarta, it is not
necessary for the internal structure of the ASF to be reflected by the web
structure. The xml.apache.org site could be a portal for a confederation of
XML related projects, rather than a single project.
In any event, if the landing PMC wants to require all PMC members to
subscribe to the PPMC list, that's fine by me. :-)
The project is under the Incubator PMC, i.e., the Incubator PMC Chair is the
ASF Officer responsible for the project until it leaves the Incubator. That
much is a given. However, one of the reasons for having the landing PMC
involved is to provide a structure for them to take a lead role, and prepare
the project for life in that PMC. That said, I would not dismiss the
Incubator PMC as simply being "in the loop."
> > Hopefully the PPMC will be dissolved by merging it with the landing PMC.
> Or by simply removing the Incubator PMC members
Same thing, from the Incubator's perspective.
> > We dropped the "practice" designation.
> So what does the extra "P" stand for now?
Actually nothing. But since everyone keeps asking, I consulted Mr. Roget.
Two choices could be "provisional" and "possible" -- as adjectives for the
project, not the committee. Personally, I would not bother to expand the
acronym.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
