On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ant is reflecting a real dilemma here. At Apache, we try to be > egalitarian, and we try to work by consensus. The natural conclusion > is that the many people needed to vote on releases are also part of > the decision-making body for policy that controls those releases.
Please step back to the orignal roots of the problem here. It may offer alternate solutions. In essence, the *BOARD* needs to approve every release from the ASF. The Board delegates this responsibility to reach scale. Those delegates, operating in the Board's name, will then approve the releases. The problem at hand: find and designate those delegates. It doesn't matter how. The current solution is "the release votes have been delegated to (I)PMC Members, and it requires three to establish ASF approval." Maybe there is another path. Talk about it, run it by the Board, and get it approved. I believe there are *many* solutions. Just fine one that works in this large, variant environment. >... > Ross' other proposal :-), to move documentation (and thus some/much of > the locus of policy decision) making to comdev, reduces the load of > decision-making that the IPMC has to find consensus on, and thus > proposes to reduce the stress. Documentation about the ASF *should* move to ComDev. It is history that has left that doc scattered around. Its logical (and eventual) home lies with ComDev. I forsee ComDev as a group who documents "who we are", and "how we work", and ... I forsee the Incubator as the *mechanism* of teaching what ComDev has explained. >... Cheers, -g --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
