Anything happening in this regard?

-Harish

Costin Manolache wrote:

Ted Husted wrote:


Right now, the only plan seems to be to nominate committers one-by-one on the PMC list. I'm just saying that we shouldn't play favorites. I believe all Jakarta committers have already earned membership in the PMC; we should tender the offer to every Jakarta committer and let each decision-maker decide for himself or herself.




If the consensus is that the "bootstrap" PMC will continue to hand-pick which of our duly-elected committers are promoted to the PMC, and which are not, then so be it. But, personally, I think that process is nothing but busy work. The community has already decided. Let's ratify the community's decisions and let Jakarta be whatever Jakarta wants to be.


+1

It seems this is the consensus, to add most committers - one by one or ten by ten. Let's go with that for now, almost everyone is agreeing with the goal of having everyone who cares included ( I didn't see a vote yet, but it seems pretty clear we agree on this ).

I don't like the process of "hand-picking" either - unfortunatly that's the norm in ASF ( membership and all other PMCs use the same mechanism).

I hope after we get past the first stage we can have a [VOTE] and change this to people _volunteering_ for PMC - by sending a mail with
"subscribe" subject and the list of sub-projects the person is volunteering to monitor.



IMO the only way out of this discussion is to divide the problem into very small pieces and have real VOTEs and counting of each of them. Proposals with more than 1 "atom" have no chance, and most of the problems occur because everyone seems to think he knows what the others think without asking.


Please people, write down what you want, separate it in very elementary pieces, then post a VOTE and see what the majority things ( it may be "consensus" or a simple majority - but at least you'll know what other think ).

Like:

1. Extend the PMC:
- to include all committers ( even if the don't want )
- to include all the comitters who want
- to include all who want and prove they understand the rules

2. Future extension of the PMC:
- hand-picking by current people
- people volunteering - because we trust them already to write the code and do the work, and it's fair to let them join whenver they want.



3. Jakarta and TLPs
- 'encourage' every subproject to TLP
- let each subproject decide if they want to leave jakarta- without encouragements
- 'encourage' only subprojects that have problems
- do a selection based on some characteristic ( like projects that "fit" togheter - whatever that means)
- try to keep jakarta togheter and increase the community ( as jakarta-commons did ). If someone really wants to go - of course let him.


4. Is jakarta a good thing ?
- yes, not perfect but we are improving and working better with other jakarta people
- no, it's just a mess
- yes, other projects should do what jakarta does !



I hate when people keep talking about "consensus" and argue as if they knew what the consensus was, but we don't have even the most elementary vote to indicate what a majority thinks.


And BTW - please make sure that the votes explicitely state that all _committers_ should vote, but only PMC member votes are binding !!! That's why people should volunteer for PMC, however this is about jakarta and comitters are what jakarata means.


Costin




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to