On 12/23/05, Erik Abele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 23.12.2005, at 16:57, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 09:11:55AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > ... > >> I think that there's little downside to this. A check on the > >> Incubator PMC is the board - any member or PMC could appeal to the > >> board in the event that they believed their proposals were not being > >> treated fairly, or if the Incubator PMC was behaving in general in a > >> way they disagreed with. > >> And the board has to answer to the membership. > > > > I believe that there is *major* downside to having the Incubator PMC > > second-guess the decisions of other PMCs. > > +1. > > > If someone doesn't like the decision of a PMC, they shouldn't be > > able to > > use the Inucbator PMC as cover for their attacks. People who don't > > like > > what's going on in that PMC should confront that PMC directly. If > > they > > don't like what's going on in that PMC and have tried to redress their > > grievances directly, they can go to the Board. > > +1.
requiring a vote by the incubator pmc would not be about second guessing the wishes of a pmc but applying a second set of criteria. these would be a subset of the criteria that the incubator pmc applies to graduation. in most cases, this should be a formality but i believe that these is sufficient concern amongst the membership to justify adding this additional bit of ceremony. (and yes, i do know that this sucks in many ways and this extra ceremony will hamper community based proposals but i think that our hand has been forced. we should deal with the problems surrounding innovation and ceremony separately.) IMO given that podlings are being aggressively publicised (unfortunately now sometimes even before they are born) and strongly associated with the ASF in the minds of the public, there is now a certain level of due diligence which can no longer be left to be sorted out once the podling has been accepted for incubation. in particular: 1 project names (it's no longer good enough to enter the incubator with a legally suspect name) 2 lack of oversight energy 3 that the initial legal paperwork is in order 4 any other issues which would give the podling no hope of graduating including a formal vote from the incubator pmc would have (i believe) additional process advantages: it will give a clear line for evangelists - no talking about a potential podlings as if it were an apache project until this vote is passed. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
