On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 5:03 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> > If you hold a public vote to make them committers, they are not on the > PPMC. > If you hold a private vote, likewise. If you hold a vote to make them > committers > as well as PPMC members, and send the new list of PPMC members to the > IPMC as lazy concensus of the roster change, then they become both. I'd > like > to see that happen. These words matter in voting, and we might as well > get > them right every time a new committer and/or [P]PMC member is suggested. > [I realize this contradicts my early comments about treating people-votes, any committee-change vote with active consensus and unanimity. The IPMC or the Board (for incubating and top-level projects, respectively) do not pretend to know all of the committers to our project, unlike the project's committee members, and those names are brought up for passive approval entirely only for reporting and a bit extra scrutiny. They realistically won't be contradicted unless someone has some seriously negative karma that the IPMC or Board are aware of, but the IPMC and Board aren't expected to '+1' each person they don't know of.]
