Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Following from Berin's reuest, I've drafted up a legalistic proposal relating to the ponts abput PMC voting procedures. Please not that this does not address lots of things - but that's the point - it is only dealing with the procedures concerning decion making. The interntion is to put this up for commmunity vote and a subsequent PMC vote. For PMC members it is important to note that this text is chnging the voting rights that you have today - so please ready carefully. Cheers, Steve.
APACHE AVALON PMC VOTING PROCEDURES - PROPOSAL
Definitions
----------
Definition 1. PMC
All references to the PMC within this document shall be deemed as
the Apache Avalon Project Management Committee, established in
accordance with the Apache Board resolution of the
20 November 2002 as detailed with the following document or
amendments adopted in accordance with the procedures herein
defined.
http://jakarta.apache.org/avalon/AVALON-PMC-RESOLUTION.TXT
Definition 2. PMC Membership
The PMC membership as established by the Apache Board
resolution as detailed under definition [1]:
This reflects the present but fails to indicate directions for the future. Say, how can somebody come in or go out of a PMC?
This is only addressing the P&P for how decisions are made. It is not the end-game - just the step on agreeing how top agree.
Definition 3. PMC Chair A member of the PCM, as defined in definition [2], duly elected by the PMC Members to represent the interest of the PMC and the broader Avalon Community towards the Apache Board as defined under the PMC resolution and/or adopted amendments (definition [1]).
Again, this reflects the present, but not the future. I propose to have the chair elected every 6 months.
Again - that's a seperate subject that needs to be dealt with but can be considered indepedently of the subject of rules for agreement.
Definition 3. PMC Charter
The initial charter of the PMC is defined under the Apache Board
resolution as detailed under definition [1].Definition 4. Normal Vote Normal votes shall be deemed as any vote not falling within the scope of a Qualified Majority Vote as defined by definition [5]. Definition 5. Qualified Majority Vote. A Qualified Majority Vote is a vote applied to any of the following: (a) Modification to and amendment of the PMC Charter as defined by definition [3]. (b) modification to or amendment of the policies and procedures established hereunder.PMC Policies and Procedures (P&P) --------------------------------- Article 1, PMC Voting Procedures (a) Preconditions to Voting A vote shall be proceeded by prior discussion, normally initiated by a an email thread commencing by the "[PROPOSAL]" tag with the message title. Proposal resulting in the establishment of a vote shall be presented under a thread commencing with the "[VOTE]" tag. The PMC Chair may disallow a vote at his/her discretion, providing that justification is provided. PMC chair decisions on vote integrity shall be binding on the PMC members.
Nah, a PMC chair shoudn't even be noticed as a chair, but as a secretary. It should be as hidden as possible. I don't think we need this, it's a call for making chairs appear rude.
There is never a need to disallow a vote.
I'm pretty strong on this: I would like the PMC chair to be as simple and transparent as possible.
I think the last couple of sentences could be reworked - these is plently of evidence of badly formed votes that lead to missunderstandings - and people launching votes within properly declaring them as such. These are exactly the sort of things real chairs do. Working suggestions apreciated - I'll thinnk about it as well.
(b) Quorum Calculations Quorum on all motions shall be at least three (3) and not less than 50% of the elected members (rounded up to the nearest non-fractional number). (c) Normal Majority Vote A vote undertaken within the scope of a Normal Vote as defined by definition [4] shall require a 50% majority before the vote may be considered as binding, shall be subject to the quorum calculations as defined under Article 1 (b), vote duration as defined by Article 1 (e), and validity shall be subject to reasonable engagement towards actions as defined under the voting preconditions of Article 1 (a), where the notion of reasonable shall rest with the PMC Chair.
Again, we don't need the chair to do anything. Let's cut the legal crap as much possible. and let's remove potential friction points.
Don;t see a problem changing this.
(d) Qualified Majority Vote A vote undertaken within the scope of a Qualified Majority Vote as defined by definition [5] shall require a 2/3 majority (rounded to the nearest non-fractional number) before the vote may be considered as binding upon the PMC members. (e) Vote Duration Any vote conducted by the PMC may be closed within 7 days of its initiation providing that quorum has been met in accordance with Article 1 (b). A vote not meeting quorum during the initial 7 day period shall default to a 14 day duration. On expiration of a 14 day vote duration, if quorum has not been achieved, the vote shall be consider as s failed vote.
I agree with Paul's vision that 'within' is bad. I see this already patched in a later version so I'm cool with this.
(f) Post-conditions to Voting A vote shall be concluded by a result announcement presented by email under a thread commencing by the "[VOTE-RESULT]" tag with the message title. The PMC Chair count shall stands as the final authority on vote counts. Non announcement of a vote result by the chair within 60 days of the initiation of a vote shall render the vote null and void.
Again, no need for all this bureucratic stuff. When the vote is over, somebody will post the count (not only the chair can count, hopefully) and tell me, are you really going to wait 60 days before asking what's going on?
Already removed.
As I said previously, let's write the smallest possible thing that can possibly make sense. And let the chair be perceived as just another member with no particular power... otherwise you'll have to spend half of your time dissipating the friction that will emerge everytime there is no absolute consensus on the chair election (like right now, for example)
I'll put some more time into it later today. Cheers, Steve. -- Stephen J. McConnell OSM SARL digital products for a global economy mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.osm.net -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
