We need to make you a commiter NOW!
=)
--jason
On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 12:38 AM, n. alex rupp wrote:
If speed is the concern, how is a week-long process (option #1) better than
the traditional process (option #2)?
In option number two any of the committers can suggest someone, bring up a
vote and conclude the matter by day's end. There is no week-long waiting
period and there is no need to coordinate efforts with an ASF sponsor. It
just happens, as quickly as the developers see fit. (PMC intervention
notwithstanding)
( the non-committer places his imaginary ballot) -0 for option #1 +1 for option #2
-- N. Alex Rupp ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Blewitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 12:28 PM Subject: Re: [vote] Process for adding committers
Surely the basic ideas are the same, though? They are following ASF procedures; the only difference proposed by Davanum is that to kick-start the process off, rather than waiting for the committers to propose people, a number of people step forward in that week and then block voting occurs. The only difference is kick-starting the list of proposed committers.
Alex.
On Wednesday, Sep 10, 2003, at 18:21 Europe/London, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
With two options on the table, I think we need to put this to bed quickly so I am calling for a vote between the two following options:
Option #1 from Davanum Srinivas: Step #1: 1 week of Nominations. Existing committers can nominate new committers by sending a note to the dev mailing list. Step #2: One of the ASF sponsors consolidates the list of nominations and starts a VOTE on the dev mailing list. VOTE is open for 1 week. Existing committers can use +1/+0/-0/-1 to indicate their preference in an email to the dev mailing list. Step #3: ASF sponsor conveys the result of the VOTE to the incubator PMC and asks for permission to add the new committers.
Option #2 from Ryan Ackley: Step #1: Any committer can propose someone as a committer at any time. The proposing committer generally lists their contributions and why they should be made a committer. Step #2: Any current committer can vote on the new committer. The vote is open for 3 days and requires consensus ( three +1's and no -1's) as per http://incubator.apache.org/drafts/voting.html (note this is a different link than Ryan's original) Step #3: A positive result is handled as per http://incubator.apache.org/drafts/newcommitters.html
We go with whichever option gets the highest score after three days (+1's less -1's) unless the outcome is obvious.
My vote:
Option #1:
-0 jboynes - I think we should use a standard process from the
beginning for all committers rather than a custom one
Option #2: +1 jboynes - It's the normal process
