On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Joe Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Simon Phipps <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: >> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 9:58 AM >> Subject: Re: Umbrella projects >> >> >> On 12 Sep 2011, at 14:12, Rob Weir wrote: >> >>> It would be useful if you explained what you meant by "autonomy" >> so it >>> is clear about what you are talking about. >> >> "Autonomy" in the case of a localisation would mean being free to >> create releases without needing to translate decisions made by the developers >> (regardless of what's changed) into any other language. Obviously anything >> that moves upstream would need to be represented in English. > > Provided that there are sane versioning rules for the sources, I don't > see why a local language "preliminary release vote" needs to be held here. > OTOH I do know that the only votes that count are (P)PMC votes, so any source > release needs to follow all the normal rules of an ASF release, including > soliciting positive votes from the IPMC on general@incubator. > > Once the project graduates those per-lang decisions still need to be carried > out by PMC members, tho they don't necessarily have to do it on an English > language mailing list, provided they are able to accept votes from > English-speaking-only members of the PMC regarding their candidates. >
I disagree. I don't think, for example, that it would be sufficient to call for a release vote in Japanese on a Japanese mailing list. This would be true, even if three PPMC members were contacted off list to point them to the otherwise obscure voting thread. That is tantamount to a stealth ballot. Why not just send the ballot to ooo-commits in Sumerian? We need a standard, well-known, recognized "polling place" for votes to occur, and I think that is be with ooo-dev. -Rob
