+1

I agree, Jon is very active on the project - specially the Eclipse
plugin - and as you said if he has  the required awareness so he is
the right one to be added to the PMC.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Daniel S.
Haischt<[email protected]> wrote:
> Short note - if anybody has questions concerning legality concerns,
> especially you Jon, feel free to drop me a note. I am responsible for
> preparing the GA releases of an IBM program product where I am
> especially focus on the open source aspects. The product has an
> Eclipse client and a middle-tier component and both are re-using
> plenty of Apache software.
>
> Cheers
> Daniel
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:52 AM, David Blevins<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Since Jon has the most awareness of the eclipse plugin and is going to be
>> doing a release, both of which are very much acting in a legal sense, I
>> think we should add him to the PMC.
>>
>>  --- pmc info as it relates to openejb ---
>>
>> We don't focus on the PMC in this project so many may not have a clear
>> concept of it.  Every project at Apache has a PMC which at minimum
>> represents Apache from a legal perspective.  The people on it are expected
>> to provide legal oversight, making sure that the legal entity that is Apache
>> has awareness enough to legally protect the code that leaves it's doors, the
>> users that use it, and the people who create it.  This means making sure any
>> contributions going into the project are clean and can be legally projected
>> and making sure any binaries going out meet the legal requirements so they
>> as well can be legally protected.  It's a lot of watching all commits,
>> keeping an eye on doc contributions, ensuring CLAs are on file for anything
>> of substantial size, screening release binaries and source for headers,
>> license files, making sure any binaries being widely distributed have been
>> voted on, etc., etc.  If you are on the PMC and you vote on a release it
>> means *you* have done all these things to the best of your ability.  If you
>> have not, you either should not be on the PMC or should not vote +1.
>>
>> Being on the PMC is a service, not an achievement.  Therefore if someone is
>> added to the PMC you should not say "congratulations", but simply "thank
>> you."  It does not mean anything more than they have the time to help us
>> function legally.  If someone is perpetually too busy to provide legal
>> oversight and steps down or goes emeritus, it does not mean they are
>> leaving, just that they are too busy for the extra legal responsibility.
>>
>> Some projects go beyond that and use the PMC as the decision makers and
>> leaders of the project.  We do not.  We make all our decisions here.  We
>> don't even focus on who is a committer and who is not, which I think is a
>> major factor of our family-like community and general "everyone is welcome
>> and matters" spirit.  If someone doesn't feel like their input matters till
>> they are a committer, or any other status, we've done something wrong.
>>  Fortunately, this is one of our strongest attributes and part of the magic
>> that is this community.
>>
>> That's the 10,000 foot view.
>>
>>  ------------------------------------------
>>
>> Back to the subject at hand.  I don't think we have enough legal oversight
>> for the eclipse plugin.  Jon is the obvious remedy for that.
>>
>> Jon, any questions and do you think you have time to help provide the extra
>> oversight?  I don't think anything goes into the eclipse plugin that you
>> haven't seen and you're now learning all the ins and outs of a legally solid
>> release, so you're more or less doing what is required already.  If you are,
>> I'll put up a vote for adding you.  If not, we might want to hold the
>> release; there's no rush.
>>
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>



-- 
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
- LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mnour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

Reply via email to