> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 8:17 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Change the project bylaws to modify the PMC Chair voting
> process and add a term length
>
> Hi all,
>
> As previously discussed [1], we'd like to make a change to our bylaws [2] to
> modify the method of selecting a PMC chair. We also want to add a term for
> the chair.
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/ifwwce657u36yuwz
> [2]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Apache+CloudSt
> ack+Project+Bylaws
>
>
>
> Below are the specific changes I'd like you to vote on:
>
> (1) A change to bylaw section 2.4.5 as follows:
>
> 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, or the term of the
> current chair expires, the PMC votes to
> recommend a new chair through consensus via a lazy 2/3 majority
> voting method. In the case that consensus is not achieved, the PMC
> will vote for a chair using Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting.
> Due to the fact that the discussions are about specific individuals,
> this vote would be held on the cloudstack-private mail list.
> The decision must be ratified by the Apache board.
>
> (2) The addition of a new bylaw section: 2.4.6:
>
> PROPOSED:
>
> 2.4.6. The role of PMC chair will have a one year term. The intention
> of this term is to allow for a rotation of the role amongst the PMC
> members. This intention does not prohibit the PMC from selecting the
> same chair to serve consecutive terms.
>
>
>
> Per our bylaws (section 3.4.9), this change requires a lazy majority of PMC
> members to pass.
>
> The whole community is encouraged to vote on this issue!
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> Please respond with one of the following:
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
>
> -chip
+1
