> A vote is not a discussion. [1] is a discussion. While repliers send +1 but it's a discussion thread. Just no one objected or considered there is further discussion item.
> The discussion on the dev list did not substantively address who should be on the PMC based on merit and what happened during incubation. Is it a requirement? When the community has consensus among its members, I don't think a point-by-point criterion should be documented. Once any explicit point is written, it can be achieved in many ways away from its initial intention. If no one in that community objects to the proposed membership list or doubts the criterion, it should be fine. I can name a long list of ASF projects that don't have a written-down criterion. However, I agree that the PPMC can be more active to extend its membership. I'm fine seeing its continuous growing during/after this discussion thread. Best, tison. Justin Mclean <[email protected]> 于2026年5月26日周二 23:02写道： > Hi, > > A vote is not a discussion. The discussion on the dev list did not > substantively address who should be on the PMC based on merit and what > happened during incubation. It proposed the initial list from the project > proposal and moved to a vote without that reflection. > > When a project graduates, the community should discuss who has earned PMC > membership based on their contributions during incubation, rather than > simply ratifying the original committer list from the donation proposal. > > This project needs some self-reflection here. > > Kind Regards, > Justin > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
