On Tuesday 21 December 2004 17:03, Greg Stein wrote:

> > (12:10:11) gstein: mcconnell: aaron *is* the PMC
> > ((12:46:05) gstein: the members of the PMC is an artificial construct
> > created by the Chair

> You lost a lot of context there. 

Ok, agree, but I thought it being unnecessary to quote 71kB of IRC. ;o)

And now I lost some more ;o)

> And yes, the Chair defines the rules/procedures. And when they fail to
> keep the project and community on track, then the Chair can change the
> rules. Simple as that.

> There have certainly been insinuations in this thread and others that
> my positions or stances are "part of the problem." You're certainly
> entitled to that point of view, but I'm similarly confident that I
> have been acting in the best interests of the ASF in this matter, and
> that I have the support of the Membership. 

Sure you have. You definately have *my* support (although not worth much, 
maybe a even negative worth) as Chairman of ASF.

Now, section 6.3 in the ByLaws of the ASF doesn't rhyme entirely correctly 
with the quotes from the IRC session.

You said; The PMC is an artificial construct.
Section 6.3 forgets to mention that.

You said; Aaron IS the PMC.
Section 6.3 uses the wording "shall be primarily responsible for project(s) 
managed by such committee"

IANAL, and is not comfortable in trying to make the Section 6.3 clearer, but I 
beg those who a. understand the mechanics properly, b. capable of formulating 
the language, c. has the authority to do so, to re-phrase into a more 
accurate depictment of the PMC, its Chair vs its members.

I mean, if the PMC is purely advisory, then write that.

This whole episode is also marred by "Project ByLaw", which I have been told 
does not to exist (or do they? confusion!), yet is mentioned that the PMC is 
tasked to establish them. And those established at Avalon seems partly being 
contradictory to what Greg says (which I take as most authorative at this 
Avalon bylaws are now no longer online, but let's look at an example of 
contradiction in the Excalibur TLP bylaws, passed by their PMC [1];


Under Project Management Committee, first paragraph, second sentence;
The PMC is responsible to the board and the ASF for the management and 
oversight of the Apache Excalibur codebase.

Well, apparently the PMC is not responsible and not authorative, only the PMC 

IMHO, these types of discrepancies are the true root of this thread. And 
instead of dismissing everything from my mouth at sight and being sick of me 
dragging this on, please take a moment and review my findings and move for a 
clarification of the PMC role (and the Chair), its responsibility and 
authority, and make that in writing to avoid any future misunderstandings 
elsewhere. And in the same go, ask the PMCs to review their "PMC Bylaws" (if 
they exist) whether they are in conflict with this clarified view.


http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=698
  / http://www.dpml.net       /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to