On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>wrote:
> I find this post disturbing. Had it been posted before the vote closed I > most certainly would have voted -1 as we don't encourage hostile forks at > the ASF. I hadn't realized the vote was closed until after sending the message -- my apologies. I don't wish to stir things up unnecessarily but is there any possibility of redoing the vote? * Per [1,2,3] it's not clear to me that the vote followed the Incubator's documented procedures. Who was the Sponsor who called the vote? Presumably Hyrum Wright is acting as Champion, but he seems to have initiated and closed the vote as well as making the proposal. * The announcement that the vote was closed, and the tally of votes, was not made in a separate thread. (I was not subscribed to this list until this week; until then I was only watching the discussion through the web archive, and I didn't notice that the vote was closed.) * Having a 72 hour voting period does not seem to be required[4] and it seems very short for a proposal of this nature. (Finding the time to write my message, and collecting the references, took me five days.) * In particular a 72 hour voting period in the middle of December seems especially short, as many people travel or are otherwise occupied for holidays. [1] "The decision to accept a project is taken on a vote by the Sponsor." from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Process_Description.html#Acceptance [2] "The decision to approve the candidate proposal MUST be taken on a vote by the Sponsor" from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Approval+of+Proposal+by+Sponsor [3] http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Sponsor [4] "The Sponsor will typically take about 7-10 days before announcing a vote result." http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Process_Description.html#Acceptance -- though glancing through the list's recent archives a 72-hour period doesn't seem atypical.
