On 10/3/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 3, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
>> I don't care what the PPMC decides to do provided that it is the
>> PPMC that makes the decisions and that decision is made on an Apache
>> mailing list. Mentors have NO RIGHT and NO RESPONSIBILITY to make
>> decisions on behalf of a project as if they owned the project. The
>> Mentors are only there to help the project govern itself and, in
>> some cases, be counted as one of the people on the PPMC.
>
> To be really picky, that is not quite accurate. I wholeheartedly
> agree that
> Mentors have no right to make decisions as if they owned the
> project. They
> are there to help and be part of the community decision making
> process.
> However, Mentors have the only binding votes. You have many times
> decried
> giving binding votes to people who are not on a PMC.
That's why we created the PPMC == the entire set of committers of the
podling and the Mentors.
this is not policy ATM
They do have binding votes on everything
*except* releases because we delegated that to them, right?
i don't understand how this can work with the current structure. AFAIK
PPMCs have no organisational standing (they are no official
committees) and are not recognized by the board. AIUI they cannot take
decisions binding on apache. their main role ATM seems to be as a
training exercise.
bootstrapping is simply a description of the only process available
ATM. the mentors (as incubator pmc members) are the only ones on the
project who have the binding votes required to take decisions (such as
appointed PPMC members).
if this process isn't good enough then let's create a better one.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
