On Saturday 18 February 2006 14:42, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > The process is that the PPMC should be voting, just as we would in any > project. The process has nothing to do with the policy (whom, how many, > etc.).
Side note; I have hanged around ASF a long time as many others. A long time ago votes were fairly rare and formal. Nowadays, votes are flying left, right and center. What happened to the good'ol "Community Consensus", which didn't require votes? > > I can't see any benefit of the three mentors doing a > > person-by-person vetting process. > > Who said that they would? And the first thing that I suggested that the > PPMC do is vote Bill Flood and Ismael onto the PPMC. So, are we seeing a new policy being formed?? 1. Get N mentors to back a proposal. 2. These mentors form the initial PPMC. 3. The regular "Apache Way" process takes over. 4. A "mega patch" in form of "initial codebase" constitutes commitment and likelihood of committer status. Maybe not. My point is; Last year's project, Harmony notable exception, started with an initial set of committers. *Now* this has been changed. Why? Becase instead of 6 person strong (or weak) initial committership list, we now see a much stronger initial community, 37 people, many who will probably be more active than "freeriders" on other projects? It doesn't make sense... Over and out. Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
