On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > I am only comfortable allowing singular IPMC votes from members of the ASF. > I think the IPMC owes this much to the other members of the Foundation.
I've now contemplated this condition for a few days and while I'm prepared to accept it for the sake of compromise, I'm not in favor of it. As I look over the IPMC roster, there may be people who are not the strongest with regards to reviewing releases (they are often strong in other areas), but I don't see a correlation between those people and whether or not they were elected onto the IPMC. If anything, it's the opposite -- the people who routinely miss errors, cast bare +1 votes with no explanations of what they reviewed, or fail to vote at all, are most often ASF Members who exercised their prerogative to join the IPMC by request. In contrast, the people who got onto the IPMC by demonstrating Incubator merit and getting elected tend to be more conscientious. If any group stands out as particularly competent, it is those who were elected onto the IPMC first and subsequently became ASF Members. But in my estimation, the group which would be excluded under this proposal -- people who were elected onto the IPMC but who are not ASF Members (yet) -- is on average, considerably above the level of the IPMC as a whole[1]. So... I question whether this provision will succeed at guaranteeing that solo IPMC votes come from someone highly competent. It complicates the release process by stratifying the IPMC. And it doesn't jibe with my sense of meritocracy. I'd rather that we go with Bertrand's proposal unmodified, which takes a different tack: striving to improve the quality of each vote cast. What do others think? Marvin Humphrey [1] Let's avoid mentioning names on the public list. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
