Date: 2003-12-02T09:24:02 Editor: NicolaKen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wiki: Incubator Wiki Page: PpmcProposal
Initial draft for PPMCs New Page: = PPMC Proposal = == Description == To make Incubating project learn to govern themselves and govern themselves at the same time, each project gets a PPMC, that is a Project PMC (is this right?) that works similarly to a PMC but refers to the Incuabtor PMC instead of the board. == Who should be on each ppmc? == * all PMC members of the future PMC (committers + landing PMC members) * all Incubator PMC members (not just mentors?) This means that the Mentors would be the only ones that must stay also on the other project mailing lists. The PPMC would consist of *all* PMC members from both the landing PMC and the Incubator PMC, plus the committers. The Mentors would be the ones required to participate on the -dev list. The rest would have to "catch up" to the extent that PPMC discussion requires external context. Otherwise, it won't scale. Committers would be on the PPMC but not on the Incubator PMC. This might bear tweaking, but for Incubator purposes, the project Committers would be part of the Incubator PMC. If this structure were adopted by Jakarta, however, each sub-project would have a PPMC, and the Jakarta PMC would be the union of all. == Reporting the the main Incubator PMC == Development and discussions will still go on the dev lists, and only Mentors have to be there. Yes, but the status update issue would occur on the PPMC list, which *IS* the union of the Incubator PMC, the Cocoon PMC and the Lenya Committers. That is what the notion of reporting to the "main Incubator PMC" is a non-issue. The correct issue is reporting to the PPMC. The PPMC would be the means by which a project is governed. The PPMC list is the private list for its use. The PMC is for the Incubator, itself. As I am envisioning this working, if there is an issue to be addressed by the PPMC, and that issue is to be discussed in public, the PPMC would have to subscribe to the public list for discussion. There would be a summary posting to the PPMC list letting everyone know of the issue, with references to the archives. That appears to balance providing oversight with being overwhelmed. == What to do to start PPMCs == JFDI applies. Every PMC member and every ASF member that had something to say about the PPMC idea was basically in favour. We have consensus on the broad plan; enough of a mandate to get things underway. Create a PPMC battle plan and execute. It seems to me this entails the following: 1. ask infrastructure@ to create a new set of mailing lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2. get a few moderators && incubator pmc members in place for each, have them subscribe the appropriate people to it, or at least send out the invitations 3. send out welcome messages on the newly created mailing lists, explaining purpose and basic organisation, with appropriate disclaimers 4. figure out what issues we can and cannot deal with inside a PPMC as we go along** ** big design up front doesn't work well for software; I think it works even less well for communities. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
