On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 09:39:14PM +0100, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> 
> On Feb 22, 2013, at 9:29 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Continuing the graduation discussion (you're going to see plenty of
> > threads like this as we head down the road), the PPMC had a discussion
> > around how to best select the name we would recommend to the ASF board
> > to be our PMC chair.
> > 
> > Currently, our bylaws [1] state that we would use the Single
> > Transferable Vote method for this selection (see section 2.4.5).  In the
> > thread on the private list, our mentors have suggested that we may want
> > to reconsider this position.
> > 
> > I'll admit that we have it in our bylaws, purely because I started with
> > the Hadoop project's document as a starting point for our own.  I
> > believe that the Hadoop folks probably have a very good reason for this
> > approach, but perhaps it's not right for our community.
> > 
> > I'm proposing the following change:
> > 
> > CURRENT:
> > 
> >  2.4.5. If the current chair of the PMC resigns, the PMC votes to
> >  recommend a new chair using Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting.
> >  See http://wiki.apache.org/general/BoardVoting for specifics. The
> >  decision must be ratified by the Apache board.
> > 
> > PROPOSED:
> > 
> >  2.4.5. If the current chair of the PMC resigns, the PMC votes to
> >  recommend a new chair using a lazy 2/3 majority voting method.
> >  This vote would be held on the cloudstack-dev mail list, after a
> >  discussion is held on the cloudstack-private list to nominate a 
> >  candidate for the role. The decision must be ratified by the Apache 
> >  board.
> > 
> 
> The PMC would only put one candidate forward ?
> This would make the vote on the dev list more of a ratification than a vote.
> 
I guess it does that, yes.  I was attempting to straddle open vs.
respect for privacy when discussing individuals.

> Should the PMC put multiple candidates forward ?
> 
> > This is the discussion thread to see if people have any opinions.  If we
> > don't have any big concerns, I'll start a new VOTE thread to change the
> > bylaws (using the rules in section 3.4.9 of the bylaws themselves).
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> > 
> > -chip
> > 
> > [1] 
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/apache-cloudstack-project-bylaws.html
> 
> 

Reply via email to