Yep, thanks Jacques. The essential point we seem to ignore is that *one* negative vote/objection from a PMC member on a commit is enough to require a revert. This is implemented both in standard voting for proposals for code changes and in lazy consensus objections.
Jacopo On Mar 8, 2010, at 12:15 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > I think Jacopo, and I guess most of us, was/is expecting a > http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus (also called > "Consensus Gauging through Silence" at > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus) > > Jacques > > From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[email protected]> >> On Mar 8, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Hans Bakker wrote: >> >>> It would also be interesting to know what the opinion of our new PMC >>> chair Jacopo is, he is awfully quiet. When we do not agree, he has to >>> take a decision. >> >> We should all immediately stop to throw out in this public list incorrect >> statements about fictitious rules and policies: it is not a great example of >> professionalism as committers and PMC members if we clearly demonstrate that >> we don't even take the time to read the few small pages that describe how >> things in the Apache Software Foundation actually work, and also pretend to >> know how things are supposed to work. >> >> A mandatory reading is this: >> >> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html >> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html >> >> Of course we should all already have studied it in great detail, but this is >> clearly and sadly untrue. >> >> Since I start to loose my faith that you will ready this, here is a small >> part of it: >> >> =================================== >> The PMC as a whole is the entity that controls the project, nobody else. >> The Chair of a Project Management Committee (PMC) is appointed by the Board >> from the PMC Members. The PMC as a whole is the entity that controls and >> leads the project. The Chair is the interface between the Board and the >> Project. >> =================================== >> >> You want me to take decisions to resolve this fight? It is easy to resolve, >> but it doesn't require me becoming a dictator. The ASF voting policies >> already clearly explain what needs to be done: >> >> =================================== >> Votes on code modifications follow a different model. In this scenario, a >> negative vote constitutes a veto, which cannot be overridden. >> =================================== >> >> Since this incident was originated by your commit, and since Scott is a PMC >> member whose vote is binding and since he clearly objected to your commit... >> you should now know what you *had* to do. >> That was easy, wasn't it? Just a matter of reading rules that you should >> have read when you became a PMC member, a lot of time ago. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Jacopo >> > >
