+1 (binding)
> -----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+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. > 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
