Mladen Turk wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I'm not sure that a veto applies to whether we accept a podling or
not. -- justin
Justin's point is that a release can't be vetoed, a policy can't be vetoed.
Code can be vetoed.
So, if I happen to be a board member, then eventually I would
have such an influence. As a member I should shout up, right?
Remind me to run for the next board elections.
A board's -1 here, e.g. if Justin voted -1, has just as much weight as your -1.
Justin asks if it's a vetoable subject like code, or a concensus vote like new
policy or releasing a tarball.
That said, the original committee should be voting in new committers just like
other projects do, and those commit bits should be granted based on merit.
You can certainly include 'plays by the rules' and 'debates code not coders'
and other basic civilized parts of participating in a project, in the 'merit'.
And people in general shouldn't be discussed on this list. If we have a person
problem, take it to the pmc. Folks names shouldn't be trashed on this list or
any other public ASF list. Praise in public, chastise in private and all that.
Last comment, we had the thought a long time ago about 'resetting' committers
at the end of incubation, forming an official PMC and then having that PMC
reassess the commit keys based on actual merit during incubation. I don't
remember if that thread ever came to a conclusion.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
