On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > Please don't apologize for a change that is proper and Right. In fact, > when you look at the *actual* change, it is awesome. It is a clear > benefit for the podling and project, and a demonstration of WSO2's > generosity around the trademarks that it has worked to build. > > There should not be a need to apologize for Doing The Right Thing. > > I find it Wrong that others should make you feel like you've done > something wrong. Grrr. > > Great first steps for Marvin before the Board votes him to be the new > IPMC Chair. :-(
The Incubator has started to acquire a habit of altering proposals while VOTEs are underway. In my opinion, the principle that we VOTE on frozen proposals with fixed language is worth an occasional protest vote. Arguably, personnel VOTE threads which duplicate the +1s expressed in a preceding DISCUSSION thread are wasteful, since the only meaningful action is a subsequent Board ACK in response to a VP request. Podling graduation votes are similar in that they gauge consensus and yield a recommendation but the only meaningful action is a subsequent Board resolution. Podling *proposal* votes, however, are different because they do not trigger an escalation to the Board, but instead set a long chain of events in action supervised by the Incubator alone. The Incubator has previously experienced significant problems when controversies have arisen over the legitimacy of podling proposals which were not thoroughly vetted. The IPMC can take weeks and hundreds of emails to hash out the meaning of a disputed proposal. I don't know about anybody else, but I've started spending a little more time on proposal review in the hopes of avoiding another such fiasco. That said, I may have miscalibrated the numeric value of my protest vote. I deliberately did *not* vote -1 or request that the VOTE be cancelled because that would have been stupid overkill. My goal was to reach the membership of the IPMC with a gentle reminder (the third this month) that ostensibly, we VOTE on "final" proposals[1] rather than moving targets. Reaching Sanjiva was unintended; the error was neglecting to mark the wiki page as "final" before the VOTE was kicked off -- not the subsequent edit. It's inconceivable to me that this will have an ounce of impact on either someone of Sanjiva's accomplishments or a future podling with the momentum of Stratos, but to ensure that my positive assessment is communicated unequivocally to one and all in the VOTE tally as it was during the PROPOSAL thread, I hereby change the value of my vote from -0 to +0.99999. I suppose it remains to be seen whether this remedy will suffice to reassure any Board members whose faith may have been shaken by this incident, though. Marvin Humphrey [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#vote --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
