+1

but small question below

On Mar 1, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote:

> 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+CloudStack+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.

mail list or email list or mailing 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

Reply via email to