The current list is good to go and includes all (both present and former) PIO folks. I am fine with going for Voting with the present list.
+1 On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > The current list of initial committers was that provided me by the > PredictionIO folks so I have every reason to believe they all have a stake > at entering incubation. > > It's totally fine with me if we stick to that list. I am just trying to > facilitate the fairest process possible. > > > On Friday, May 20, 2016, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Suneel Marthi <smar...@apache.org > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > I definitely have concerns about too many folks becoming initial > > committers > > > and bringing their own corporate agendas to this project. > > > > > > I suggest that first we vote PIO into incubator then bring in those > less > > > experienced with the project. We have a good start with people who have > > > worked on the project from several orgs. Let us get organized first and > > > then bring in new people. > > > > I think this is a reasonable concern. Andrew, any chance you can look > over > > the names of initial committers and let us know who has had a stake in > the > > project before entering the incubation vs. those who are trying to join > in > > as > > part of the ASF Incubation. > > > > I'm not saying we need to pass judgement one way or the other yet, but it > > will be a very useful data point to know before voting. > > > > Thanks, > > Roman. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > <javascript:;> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > <javascript:;> > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
