On 17 Aug 2010, at 03:31, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ---- > >> From: Noel J. Bergman <n...@devtech.com> >> To: general@incubator.apache.org >> Sent: Mon, August 16, 2010 10:00:40 PM >> Subject: RE: Radical revamp (was: an experiment) >> >> Greg Stein wrote: >> >>> Using this model decentralizes the process >> >> So does having 3+ PMC Members today. > > To me this is a common flaw in both how the IPMC operates today and how > Greg's proposal relies on 3 Members to get anything accomplished. If > you've been paying attention to what actually happens in this PMC over > time, you can't possibly have missed all the begging for votes that > goes on. > > Reliance on 3 overworked people who are typically not podling committers > to always be there when the project needs them is both unrealistic and > doesn't scale. We've been doing it for years, inflicting massive > pain on the podlings whenever they release or want new committers, > and it sucks. That's what my experiment aims to fix. I believe that not having three mentors interested enough to provide oversight on key issues indicates the project is not as valid as we might think. There is a reverse side of the too much oversight coin. People sometimes vote +1 without providing the checks. That being said this solution is not one that s perfect. Ross > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
