On 1/29/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/28/07, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 26, 2007, at 2:26 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> > On 1/25/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> > > "Only votes cast by (P)PMC members are binding. If the vote is
> >> > > positive, the contributor formally becomes an Apache committer.
> > So to confirm I have this right...
> >
> > A PPMC can vote to add a new ASF committer. They don't need a binding
> > IPMC vote (ie: no mentors, no [EMAIL PROTECTED] people). ?
>
> Hmm. Regardless of what that documentation says, I think that's wrong.
>
> Pragmatically...
> * New account requests are only to be made by PMC chairs
> (or trusted delegates I guess), and CC-ed to private@
>
> * New account requests should only be made after a CLA is
> recorded, and a PPMC doesn't (always) have access to the CLA
> registry
>
> (this from memory, I haven't read the new account docs for a while).
>
> Principally...
> * getting 3 binding +1s from people on a formal PMC established by
> the ASF board doesn't seem to be too "heavyweight" for something
> as significant as creating shell/svn/email accounts and handing
> out other committer privileges
>
> I think the vote should be by the PPMC, but there should be enough
> PMC members casting a vote to make it "super-duper-binding". That's
> what we did with harmony while it was incubating (eg votes on harmony-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], mentors always casting votes, too).
+1
That's what I was expecting to hear before I read the documentation -
that a new committer was the same as a release.
+1
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
