hi. Sorry for top posting, the board have at the last meeting acknowledged a change in our PMC group, this changes the vote situation.
With the changed we have the following situation: Danny Angus +1 Geir Magnusson Jr +1 Jan Iversen +1 Niall Pemberton +1 Sander Temme +1 Santiago Gala +1 Simone Gianny +1 Simone Tripodi +1 Tim Williams +1 Graham Leggett abstained from vote Ted Leung abstained from vote This means the vote has passed, however it would not be fair to do a "surprise attack", so we will let this mail stand for 72 hours giving all PMC a final chance to change their vote. It nobody reacts before Tuesday 22 April our bylaws are changed as proposed. I will shortly after update the bylaws page, and then present a proposal for a new homepage. have a nice easter rgds jan I. On 22 March 2014 20:19, Sander Temme <scte...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Feb 27, 2014, at 8:36 AM, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > This proposal is identical to the 2 earlier proposals, which failed to > > get enough votes. > > > > This change in the bylaws [2] requires 2/3 vote +1 of the PMC members. > > > > VOTE runs until 15 march 2014, and can be extended if deemed necessary. > > > > Vote +1 if you agree to to following > > +1 > > S. > > > - Every ASF committer can ask for one or more labs. The lab creation > > requires PMC lazy concensus, if no PMC sends a mail with -1 > > tol...@labs.apache.org within the lazy consensus period (72hours), the > > lab request is > > accepted. > > > > from/replacing > > > > - Every ASF committer can ask for one or more labs. The creation of > > the lab requires a PMC lazy consensus vote > > (at least three +1 and no -1, 72 hours). > > > > > > Reasoning: > > > > The charter [1] and homepage [2] for labs says: > > > > - Every ASF committer can ask for one or more labs. The creation of > > the lab requires a PMC lazy consensus vote > > (at least three +1 and no -1, 72 hours). > > > > However the foundations glossary [3] defines lazy consensus today as: > > > > *Lazy consensus*(Also called 'lazy approval'.) A decision-making policy > > which assumes general consent if no responses are posted within a defined > > period. For example, "I'm going to commit this by lazy consensus if > no-one > > objects within the next three days." Also see Consensus > > Approval< > http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval>, > > Majority > > Approval < > http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval>, > > and the description of the voting > > process <http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html>. > > > > Due a lazy consensus decision among PMC, earlier +1 votes are > > considered valid (of course a change in vote is fully acceptable): > > > > Danny Angus +1 > > Geir Magnusson Jr +1 > > J Aaron Farr +1 > > Niall Pemberton +1 > > Santiago Gala +1 > > Simone Gianny +1 > > Simone Tripodi +1 > > Tim Williams +1 > > > > We need binding votes from: > > > > Erik Abele > > Gregor Rothfuss > > Jan Iversen > > Noel J. Bergman > > Graham Leggett > > Reinhard Poetz > > Garrett Rooney > > Scott Sanders > > Sander Temme > > > > How we manage to succeed this time. > > > > rgds > > jan I > > > -- > scte...@apache.org http://www.temme.net/sander/ > PGP FP: FC5A 6FC6 2E25 2DFD 8007 EE23 9BB8 63B0 F51B B88A > > > >
