Hi,
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Let's leave the discussion open for at least a few weeks before
> conducting the election later this month.
Seems like we have one great nominee in Benson and emerging consensus
on electing him as the next IPMC chair.
Unless anything n
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> ...Let's see if we have more than one candidate.
>> So far we have none...
>
> Let's fix this: I nominate Benson Margulies as Incubator PMC chair.
With Benson saying "Yes" a
Hi Benson,
Thank you for the kind nomination. I'm not sure I have the time or energy for
these duties anymore, plus my goal would still be to retire the Incubator :)
and I think the folks around here actually want to see it continue on.
If it does continue you, and you're at the helm, I am confid
+1 (non-binding) for Benson for being a nice and practical guy
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> > I prefer simple. I'd rather see nominations and votes done via-email
> with
> > IPMC votes noted as (binding).
+1 for nominating Benson.
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> I prefer simple. I'd rather see nominations and votes done via-email with
> IPMC votes noted as (binding).
>
> My +1 for nominating Benson.
>
> On Oct 2, 2012, at 10:07 AM, sebb wrote:
>
> > Indeed, but that might
I prefer simple. I'd rather see nominations and votes done via-email with IPMC
votes noted as (binding).
My +1 for nominating Benson.
On Oct 2, 2012, at 10:07 AM, sebb wrote:
> Indeed, but that might be better done if/when Steve is enhanced to
> support private (as opposed to secret) votes,
Briefly ...
The process that produced Jukka was not a pretty one, and I was rather
ashamed of myself by the end of it. So, if any other qualified
candidate is available, my inclination is to defer to them. However,
it's not for me to tell the community what to do. If the community
prefers to run a
+1 Benson is really good candidate!
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: Dan Haywood
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 10:09 AM
> Subject: Re: New challenges (Was: NOMINATIONS for Incubator PMC Chair)
>
> On
I nominate Chris Mattmann. He's been a positive presence in the
incubator for years. It seems to me that the IPMC char has to both
guide the work of the group and also channel the Foundation's policies
and the board's wants and needs, and he is well-position to do all
these things.
On Wed, Oct 3,
On 3 October 2012 07:47, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
> Let's fix this: I nominate Benson Margulies as Incubator PMC chair.
>
> Benson's been actively involved in the Incubator for quite a while,
> has mentored several projects, and (despite longish emails sometimes
> IIRC ;-) has shown great abi
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> ...Let's see if we have more than one candidate.
> So far we have none...
Let's fix this: I nominate Benson Margulies as Incubator PMC chair.
Benson's been actively involved in the Incubator for quite a while,
has mentored several project
On 2 October 2012 10:20, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Volunteers for what? To use Steve you'll need
>
> To start with a volunteer to list the requirements you just listed.
> Thanks! :-) From your points it looks like we'd also need a few
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Volunteers for what? To use Steve you'll need
To start with a volunteer to list the requirements you just listed.
Thanks! :-) From your points it looks like we'd also need a few vote
counters/monitors and the rest is something I should
On 2 October 2012 00:00, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> Jukka Zitting wrote on Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 00:06:38 +0200:
>>> PPS. It would be nice if we could use Apache Steve for the election.
>>> Volunteers?
>
>
> Seems a bit premature. Let's see i
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Jukka Zitting wrote on Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 00:06:38 +0200:
>> PPS. It would be nice if we could use Apache Steve for the election.
>> Volunteers?
Seems a bit premature. Let's see if we have more than one candidate.
So far we have none.
>
Jukka Zitting wrote on Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 00:06:38 +0200:
> PPS. It would be nice if we could use Apache Steve for the election.
> Volunteers?
Volunteers for what? To use Steve you'll need
a) root@ to start the webapp
b) volunteer vote counters (monitors)
c) list of email addresses of the e
Congratulations, Jukka! You've done a fantastic job!
Karl
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Jukka Zitting
> wrote:
>> Finally, if elected (and assuming the IPMC still exists), I'd serve
>> for at most two years before calling for a
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Finally, if elected (and assuming the IPMC still exists), I'd serve
> for at most two years before calling for a re-election, or possibly
> much less if I don't find enough free cycles to perform the duty as
> well as it should.
As alre
+1 binding
With Noel's email, this vote makes sense now. Next time please do not
piggyback a vote off of an existing thread. Thanks!
Regards,
Alan
On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a
+1
Noel, thanks for your service for the past many years.
Craig
On Feb 9, 2012, at 6:28 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
+1
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional comma
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zit
+1 (non-binding)
BR
Andreas Lehmkühler
Am 09.02.2012 16:16, schrieb Mattmann, Chris A (388J):
Hi Folks,
OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
running
have aligned beyond the follow
+1 (non-binding)
Antonio
On Feb 11, 2012, at 12:29 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>> [X] +1 Recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional
>
>
> > [X] +1 Recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position.
>
>
+1
With all three other candidates having checked it, sure looks like
we found consensus!
> [X] +1 Recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additio
+1
- Leo
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> In the interest of moving the current discussion matters forward, please VOTE
> on this recommendation to the board by the IPMC. I'll leave the VOTE open
> for at least the next 72 hours:
>
> [ ] +1 Recommend Jukka Zittin
-1 to the poor way this vote was conducted and your response to
peoples concerns.
+1 for Jukka as the new chair.
Niall
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks
On 02/09/2012 09:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
[ ] +1 Recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position.
[ ] +0 Don't care.
[ ] -1 Don't recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position because...
+1 binding
-
+1
regards,
Karl
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:31 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> ...I
>> have no issue with standing down after 8 years, and Jukka is an excellent
>> and active successor. I was exceedingly pleased to see his message th
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 7:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zit
+1.
Raymond Feng
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:16 AM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)"
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligne
+1
Dan
On Thursday, February 09, 2012 7:16:25 AM Mattmann, Chris A wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running have aligned beyond the following nominee
+ 1 (non-binding)
Suresh
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 6:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
>> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
>> running
>> have aligned beyo
With that explanation, I vote: +1
On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benson Margulies
>>> wrote:
+1 (binding)
>>>
>>> +1 (bi
+1
And thanks a lot Noel!
Greetings, Marcel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
+1
>-Original Message-
>From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mailto:chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov]
>Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 10:16 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: [VOTE] Jukka Zitting for IPMC Chair (was Re: NOMINATIONS for
>Incubator PMC Chair)
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zi
+1 for Jukka and +1000 thanks to Noel.
Martijn
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> +1
>
> --- Noel
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:31 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> ...I
> have no issue with standing down after 8 years, and Jukka is an excellent
> and active successor. I was exceedingly pleased to see his message that he
> had reconsidered...
Thanks Noel for the clarification.
+1 for Jukka then!
-B
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 16:16, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the following nomine
[X] +1 Recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position.
(binding)
Go Jukka !!!
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Thanks many times Noel!
This also makes (for me) voting for Jukka again a proper process.
I'm therefore reconfirming my earlier retracted vote for Jukka, +1
Ate
On 02/10/2012 03:31 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
I'm ready to vote, but Chris said "it looks like the remaining f
+1
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Feb 9, 2012 3:17 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (in
Thank you Noel.
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Feb 10, 2012 2:32 AM, "Noel J. Bergman" wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> > I'm ready to vote, but Chris said "it looks like the remaining folks
> > (including me) that were in the running have aligned beyond the
>
With Noel's email, this vote makes sense now.
+1 to Jukka (binding)
Cheers,
Andrus
On Feb 9, 2012, at 6:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including m
+1 to Jukka Zitting! (non-binding)
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> +1 to Jukka. Many Many Thanks to Noel for guiding us all these years.
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>>> I'm ready to vote, but Chris said "it look
+1 to Jukka. Many Many Thanks to Noel for guiding us all these years.
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>> I'm ready to vote, but Chris said "it looks like the remaining folks
>> (including me) that were in the running have aligned beyond the
>> follow
Ross Gardler wrote:
> I'm ready to vote, but Chris said "it looks like the remaining folks
> (including me) that were in the running have aligned beyond the
> following nominee:" Where is the mail from Noel saying he is no longer
> standing? Have I missed something?
There wasn't one. I was trave
+1
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benson Margulies
>> wrote:
>>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>>> From my perspective, Chris's proposal and Benson's vote above
>> effectively turned thi
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benson Margulies
>> wrote:
>>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>>> From my perspective, Chris's proposal and Benson's vote above
>> effectively turned thi
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Feb 9, 2012 7:27 PM, "Doug Cutting" wrote:
>
> On 02/09/2012 08:39 AM, sebb wrote:
> > In case it's not obvious, I agree with Ross, Andrus and Marcel - I
> > think the current VOTE thread is invalid and should be cancelled.
>
> I do
On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> +1 (binding)
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>> From my perspective, Chris's proposal and Benson's vote above
> effectively turned this into a single issue question: is now the time
> for Noah to be
On 02/09/2012 08:39 AM, sebb wrote:
> In case it's not obvious, I agree with Ross, Andrus and Marcel - I
> think the current VOTE thread is invalid and should be cancelled.
I don't see how it is invalid. Chris might have added more choices or
invited more discussion first, but he can call a vote.
+1
Doug
On 02/09/2012 07:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka
eneral@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2012 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Jukka Zitting for IPMC Chair (was Re: NOMINATIONS for
> Incubator PMC Chair)
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> +1 (binding)
>
> +1 (bin
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> +1 (binding)
+1 (binding)
>From my perspective, Chris's proposal and Benson's vote above
effectively turned this into a single issue question: is now the time
for Noah to be replaced by Jukka?
There are no question that all four individ
On 2/9/2012 11:29 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> (1) Why is the IPMC different from other PMCs and holding a personnel VOTEs
> on a public ML?
Just to clarify this single issue; by rights, adding committers and
committee members is a personal issue about those individuals. But
choosing a represent
I have observations
(1) Why is the IPMC different from other PMCs and holding a personnel VOTEs on
a public ML?
(2) Why is there such a hurry to call a [VOTE] without a prior [DISCUSS]?
(3) Why can't Chris start new threads by using New Message rather than a reply
to a prior thread with a sub
On 2/9/2012 10:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, if there's an election, the fair thing is to include all candidates
>> and see who gets the majority. A vote on just one candidate is odd.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
> I suggest that this VO
On 9 February 2012 17:11, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>
>> On 02/09/2012 05:58 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>> On Feb 9, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>
On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>>
On Feb 9, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
> On 02/09/2012 05:58 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>> On Feb 9, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>>
Well, if there's an election, the fair thing is to include all
On 02/09/2012 05:58 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
On Feb 9, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Well, if there's an election, the fair thing is to include all candidates and
see who gets the majority. A vote on just one candidate
On 02/09/2012 05:54 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
...I suggest that this VOTE be withdrawn, and a true election,
with all candidates be done...
Agreed - I think Chris assumed there was only one candidate, but it's
just an assumption AFAICS
On Feb 9, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, if there's an election, the fair thing is to include all candidates
>> and see who gets the majority. A vote on just one candidate is odd.
>>
>
> Agreed.
>
> I suggest tha
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> ...I suggest that this VOTE be withdrawn, and a true election,
> with all candidates be done...
Agreed - I think Chris assumed there was only one candidate, but it's
just an assumption AFAICS.
-Bertrand
-
On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
> Well, if there's an election, the fair thing is to include all candidates and
> see who gets the majority. A vote on just one candidate is odd.
>
Agreed.
I suggest that this VOTE be withdrawn, and a true election,
with all candidates b
On 9 February 2012 16:32, Marcel Offermans wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 17:10 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>> On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:04 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ross,
>>>
>>> Sorry, I didn't see a mail from Noel, but he's already the chair.
>>> If this VOTE isn't successful, then
On Feb 9, 2012, at 17:10 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:04 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>
>> Hi Ross,
>>
>> Sorry, I didn't see a mail from Noel, but he's already the chair.
>> If this VOTE isn't successful, then he'll remain the chair. If
>> you want to explicitly cal
+1 (binding)
Thanks,
Paul
On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the fo
On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:04 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Ross,
>
> Sorry, I didn't see a mail from Noel, but he's already the chair.
> If this VOTE isn't successful, then he'll remain the chair. If
> you want to explicitly call a VOTE for Noel, go ahead, but
> this is the VOTE I am int
Hi Ross,
Sorry, I didn't see a mail from Noel, but he's already the chair.
If this VOTE isn't successful, then he'll remain the chair. If
you want to explicitly call a VOTE for Noel, go ahead, but
this is the VOTE I am interested in calling, thanks!
Cheers,
Chris
On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:50 AM, Ro
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> [ ] +1 Recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position.
+1 Greg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-
+1 (binding)
Karl Wright
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Michael McCandless
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time
I'm ready to vote, but Chris said "it looks like the remaining folks
(including me) that were in the running have aligned beyond the
following nominee:" Where is the mail from Noel saying he is no longer
standing? Have I missed something?
Ross
On 9 February 2012 15:39, Ate Douma wrote:
> +1 (bin
+1 (binding)
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
+1 (binding)
Ate
On 02/09/2012 04:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
Hi Folks,
OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
running
have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zi
+1 binding.
Thanks for putting up this vote Chris
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
>
+1 (binding)
Ralph
On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:16 AM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)"
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the foll
+1 (binding)
Tommaso
2012/2/9 Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in
> the running
> have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zitting. Su
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
> chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
> running
> have aligned beyond the following nom
Hi Folks,
OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the
running
have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zitting. Suffice to say, he
was
*my first choice* :)
In the interest of mo
I am happy to step out of the way for Jukka. He was clever enough to
stay out of the email s*** storm, and that alone, in my mind, renders
him most qualified.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> I already mentioned that I would have nominated you, and so I am
> delighted
I already mentioned that I would have nominated you, and so I am
delighted to read your message. It will be very difficult to choose
between all these strong candidates.
Cheers
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After consideration and some convincing (thanks!), I've
Hi,
After consideration and some convincing (thanks!), I've decided to
throw also my hat into the ring as a candidate to be the next chairman
of the IPMC.
I believe in that role I could be more effective in focusing more of
our collective attention at where I think it would do most good - at
the
Jim, I think you have expressed my concerns perfectly.
Mentors care for the podlings. Someone has to care for the mentors.
Not all mentors need help, not all podlings need help. We should provide
*support* all the way down for when it is needed. We should not confuse
interference with support.
G
On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:55 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> [...snip...]
>>>
>>> So that's 7 of 9 board members that are on the Incubator PMC, and
>>> a good chance they are here now, and reading this.
>>>
>>> What do Board me
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Feb 4, 2012 5:50 AM, "William A. Rowe Jr." wrote:
>
> On 2/3/2012 8:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > Lets not forget that the model referred to *included* the IPMC. The
> > IPMC once had a useful function, it was a safety net for fled
On 2/3/2012 8:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Lets not forget that the model referred to *included* the IPMC. The
> IPMC once had a useful function, it was a safety net for fledgling
> communities.
The IPMC never served that purpose. Projects were scuttled even in
its first year.
The IPMC served to
On 4 February 2012 01:47, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> On Feb 3, 2012 4:27 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
>> chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>>
...
> if you'll recall Jim's message
> to the members in the past 2 years about "intern
Hi Ross,
On Feb 3, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> On Feb 3, 2012 4:27 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
> chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:44 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>>> On
On Feb 3, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> The incubator had demonstrated that relying on mentors is not always
> sufficient. The incubator has failed in it's guidance rule. It has turned
> to oversight and interference. Your proposal, in it's current form, will
> remove the interferenc
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Feb 3, 2012 4:27 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:44 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 00:58, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> > wrote:
> >> ...
On 02/02/2012 09:58 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> What do Board members think? IPMC hats on? Great. Board
> hats on? Great too. Would be great to get opinions now
> rather than have to wait.
I like the simplicity of erasing the layer of management that is the
Incubator.
The board is a
On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:24 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 2/3/2012 8:07 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>>
>>> [...snippage...]
>>>
>>> I just don't think it is realistic to imagine that in 60 days from
>>> some near-term board meeting, we can set up this new plan, debug it,
>>> and transition the exist
On 2/3/2012 8:07 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 7:34 AM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> It seems to me that the proposed new scheme will take quite a bit of
>> setting up. There is some writing to do. More to the point, if I were
>> the board, I would want to pilot the new scheme for
Hey Sam,
On Feb 3, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:50 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>
>>
>>> What I care most about is
>>> addressed by this proposal: that there be an identified person to
>>> which feedback
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:50 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>
>> What I care most about is
>> addressed by this proposal: that there be an identified person to
>> which feedback can be directed for each report.
>
> Sure, I get that now. I'm +1 t
Hi Jim,
On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:55 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> [...snip...]
>>
>> So that's 7 of 9 board members that are on the Incubator PMC, and
>> a good chance they are here now, and reading this.
>>
>> What do Board members think? IPMC hats on? Great. Board
>> hats on? Great too. Would be gr
Hi Sam,
On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:50 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 00:58, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> And to be honest, even if you (Bill) or the board folks think
>>> that there should be an Incubation VP, are yo
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
