David,
Thanks for the explanation. I think the lesson learned is the (P)PMC
needs to be more transparent which I expect was an oversight because
things were working so well :-)
I have to say that the discussion on the topic has been really good
and shows some good community dynamics. I think the progress made on
OpenEJB3 has been spectacular (hats off to those on the commit log)
and I know there's been a lot of grinding on EJB2 regarding the new
Yoko work; net is that I think things are really going well.
Based on the issues raised and clarified by Jacek and Genender I
think things are in good shape and would give OpenEJB a solid +1
(even more so now than before) for graduation.
To make sure things are clear I'd suggest close the old vote and
respin a new one (with fewer comments :-)
Thanks for shepherding this through.
On Apr 4, 2007, at 2:42 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Ok, so here's the how/when/who info:
The link posted by Brett contains the who/when:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/incubator-
info.txt
The order goes basically (as shows in that document):
Henri, Brett, Jason (all at the same time)
David B, David J (all at the same time)
Jacek, Alan, Dain (all at the same time)
And, yes, that was all done through voting and, no, I don't just
get to pick -- I get one vote like everyone.
The three initial people brought in 2 people, the resulting 5
brought in 3 more people, the resulting 7 haven't brought in anyone
yet but it's bound to happen any day now.
As far as "why", again I can't say why others but me voted they way
they did. It was pretty much "hey how about so-and-so" followed by
a bunch of +1s. No one has been proposed and denied.
I personally have proposed 3 people (Jacek, Alan, Dain) because we
needed more people on the PPMC for legal oversite (IMHO, 5 +1s is
the practical minumum). I didn't propose more because I thought it
wise to let the "next wave" have a chance to propose people as they
saw fit.
Hope that helps.
-David
