Re: INCUBATOR-57 aka IPMC votes to ratify PPMC committers

[Craig L Russell]

On Jun 6, 2008, at 1:08 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:

On Friday 06 June 2008 09:26, Craig L Russell wrote:

Just so I'm clear on the proposal, if the PPMC votes in private, and

votes, and no binding votes, then lazy consensus (no +1 vote from any
PMC member) admits a new committer to Apache?

no Mentors or PMC members vote, the vote passes with 15 non-binding +1

No.
See Noel's comment(s).

to misunderstand?

All committer ballots require 3 +1 from PMC members. How can this be so easy

It's not that I don't understand.



Craig

It's that Justin's proposal as written doesn't mention the 3 +1 vote requirement.

flag (which is a concern in terms of perhaps the Mentorship needs

votes, then there is no ACK...


Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer

I  live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I  work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

If the podling don't have 3 PMC members voting +1, then they should raise a strengthening). If the posted not to [EMAIL PROTECTED] doesn't contain 3 binding

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature