Hi, On Jul 2, 2007, at 2:10 AM, J Aaron Farr wrote:
Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:The thread has died down with no consensus, so I'm going to try again.I apologize for being absent from these threads for the last month. Life got busy and one of the things that got dropped was the incubator general list. I don't want to rehash everything that's been discussed before, but here's my opinions as an IPMC member: I'd prefer that the decision making stays close to the PPMC. If we need the IPMC to check off on PPMC decisions, fine. That should be possible via the mentors. But let's not make this any more bureaucratic than necessary.
I agree that the Incubator should groom the PPMC toward self- governance. But that doesn't mean that the Incubator PMC can avoid its responsibilities.
Thus I'm in favor of only ONE vote.
That's why I proposed that a vote occur simultaneously on both private lists.
Furthermore, I'm not completely convinced by Noel's argument that the PPMC is a figment of our imagination. Sorry, Noel, don't mean to pick on you here. :-)
I can't claim to have read every document that pertains to this issue, but as far as the Board is concerned, PPMC's don't exist. They are a construction of the Incubator in accordance with the Incubator's charter to provide guidance to subprojects.
According to Apache Foundation how-it-works [1] which I'm assuming is normative, PMC members have the right to propose new committers. And the PMC as a whole is responsible for project governance, which includes new committers.
My point is, if the IPMC choses to delegate committer voting responsibilities to PPMCs, then the PPMC votes are just as 'binding' as IPMC votes. AFAIK, there's no legal barrier for this to happen, only procedural ones.
The discussion here is on the process (procedure) to create new committers in the incubator while staying within the Incubator's charter within the Foundation's bylaws. Which means to me that the Incubator PMC must decide (vote) on new committers. I'm not convinced yet that the Incubator PMC can decide to let another group (PPMC) decide without voting to accept the other group's decision. I guess that's a bit of a legal question.
If we can pop the stack a few frames, the reason I'm pursuing this is that I've seen several examples over the past few months where PPMC votes were taken without the Mentors voting, the PPMC tried to get the new committer on board, root ignored the request, and a general melee occurred. Also from personal experience, a new project has no idea how to get a new committer on board. There seem to be as many opinions (conflicting) as Incubator PMC members.
I'm trying to avoid these kinds of issues in future. Craig [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#asf-members
--
J Aaron Farr jadetower.com [US] +1 724-964-4515
馮傑仁 cubiclemuses.com [HK] +852 8123-7905
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Russell DB PMC, OpenJPA PMC [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://db.apache.org/jdo
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
