On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 23, 2012, at 11:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I suggest that the initial Project Management Committee (PMC) needs to be 
>>> identified before the election of a Chair from that body is undertaken.
>>>
>>
>> There is a bootstrapping issue with that suggestion.  The PMC does not
>> exist until the ASF Board creates it.  And the Board has veto power
>> over that list.  So all we have at this time, formally at least, is
>> the PPMC.
>
> No bootstrapping issue at all. The Charter Resolution consists of the PMC and 
> the Chair. It is typically moved forward by the Chair as well.
>
> The Chair is a member of the PMC.
>

The proposed Chair is a proposed member of the proposed PMC.  See the
difference?  The question is:  who determines what is proposed?  The
proposed PMC?  That there is your bootstrapping issue.

>>
>>> Also, this seems like a very good time to review, for the benefit of all 
>>> here, what the duties of PMC members are and, with respect to that, what 
>>> the specific responsibilities of the Chair are and what the special 
>>> standing of the Chair is so its accountability can be carried out.
>>>
>>
>> Indeed.  That is why my 2nd sentence was to point to a link that
>> describes exactly this.
>
> And after we review then we need to go into executive session on ooo-private. 
> Even if there is only one volunteer someone may have legitimate personal 
> questions that they need to ask.
>
> We also should take at least one week and not 72 hours.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>> - Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 10:36
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process
>>>
>>> Now that the community graduation ballot has passed, one of our next
>>> tasks is to identify a PMC Chair.
>>>
>>> You can read about the duties of a PMC Chair here:
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair
>>>
>>> How do we want to do this?
>>>
>>> A strawman proposal:
>>>
>>> 1) Nominations would be open for 72 hours.  Anyone can nominate
>>> someone for the role.  Self-nominations are fine.  And of course
>>> nominations can be declined.
>>>
>>> 2) If there is only one nomination, then we are done, provided there
>>> are no sustained objections.
>>>
>>> 3) If there is more than one nomination we discuss on the list for
>>> another 72 hours.  Discussion would primarily be on ooo-dev, but some
>>> subjects might be directed to ooo-private.
>>>
>>> 4) If after 72-hours discussion there are still two or more nominees
>>> then we vote.  Everyone would be welcome to vote, but binding votes
>>> would be from PPMC members.  If there are more than 2 candidates we
>>> would probably need to use a more complicated voting system, or have a
>>> run-off vote if none of the nominees receive an outright majority.
>>>
>>> Any improvements or alternatives to this basic scheme?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>

Reply via email to