+1
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM, William G. Thompson, Jr. <wgt...@gmail.com>wrote: > +1 . Formally adopting an Apache-style PMC is a good move for the > project for the all the reasons Marvin highlights. > > Best, > Bill > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Marvin S. Addison > <marvin.addi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > We met this afternoon with Ian Dolphin, executive director of the Apereo > > Foundation of which the CAS project is a member, to discuss CAS project > > governance. It's a pressing matter since he reminded us that the > foundation > > requires every member project to have a working governance body. The CAS > > Steering Committee has been defunct for almost a year, so it's accurate > to > > say the project presently has no functioning governance body. > > > > We agreed that an Apache-style Project Management Committee (PMC) is the > > simplest and best approach to CAS governance. Apache PMCs are loosely > > defined by the following characteristics, which are the basis of my > proposal > > for adoption: > > > > - The foundation board appoints a committee chair, presumably a member of > > the board. > > - The chair reports to the foundation board and has executive authority > over > > the committee. In practice executive authority is only exercised in > > situations where the committee cannot reach consensus or is otherwise not > > functioning properly. > > - Committers are PMC members. > > - Members (committers) vote to accept new members based on merit. > > - Voting is by lazy consensus where at least one +1 vote is sufficient to > > move forward and a single -1 vote is sufficient to block a proposal. > (It's > > worth noting that these voting rules would apply to commits/pull > requests as > > well.) > > - Communication happens primarily by public mailing lists. Exceptions are > > issues that require discretion or confidentiality; private lists are the > > appropriate channel in those situations. > > - Members agree to abide by and enforce foundation legal policy and > > foundation branding/marketing policies. > > > > A PMC as described above is a good fit for the CAS project. Strong > oversight > > from the Apereo Foundation, whom we implicitly trust as friends, affords > > resources to resolve conflicts and provide project continuity. The > > membership, voting, and communication processes closely resemble how we > work > > today, thus the PMC model adds some value while keeping consistent with > > current practice. PMCs are inherently loosely defined and flexible; other > > than meeting the requirements above they are free to develop their own > > policies to address matters as needed. In summary the PMC structure > affords > > the best balance of meeting Apereo Foundation requirements and a > governance > > model that doesn't get in the way of day-to-day project business. > > > > Please consider this proposal and provide feedback. I'm happy to field > > questions and take suggestions. > > > > Best, > > M > > > > -- > > You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: > wgt...@gmail.com > > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see > > http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev > > -- > You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: > ape...@unicon.net > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see > http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev > -- You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev
