+1, sounds fine to me.
On 10/20/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Cliff
I've read your note a couple of times.
In summary it seems to say that:
1. all *active* committers can join the PPMC
2. they don't have to
3. the mentors decide who is active
Unless I missed something, I'm +1 on that.
Paul
On 10/19/06, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd first like to hear what the other mentors (James and Paul) think
> about the process/guidelines I've proposed.
>
> Cliff
>
> On 10/19/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Cliff,
> >
> >
> > I am happy with this process, would the next step be to put names
> > forward to
> > be voted into the PPMC?
> >
> > Regards
> > Carl.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> > > I'm finally getting back to the PPMC discussion (see below for a
> > > reminder of where we left off)...
> > >
> > > Some of you may have read some of the debate about how to set up the
> > > PPMC on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list a few weeks ago (if you're a
> > > committer, you really should be subscribed to that list -- lots you
> > > can learn from even just lurking). There are still a few opinions on
> > > how to do things, but here is my proposal for this project:
> > >
> > > - Each mentor is a member of the PPMC.
> > >
> > > - All committers should have the opportunity to be members of the
> > > PPMC, because I believe much of the purpose is to learn how PMCs work.
> > >
> > > - Any committer who would rather just limit their participation to
> > > committing code without being involved in broader project issues
> > > should not feel at all obligated to become part of the PPMC. To be on
> > > a PMC is work on behalf of the Foundation -- not everyone wants to do
> > > that, which is fine. A PPMC is not quite a PMC, but it's the same
> > > idea.
> > >
> > > - Any committer who has not really been participating in the project
> > > should not ask to me part of the PPMC. I'd suggest such folks spend
> > > some time contributing to the project first. I would also discourage
> > > people from asking to become part of the PPMC if they aren't expecting
> > > to contribute to the discussions. I think this is especially
> > > important when the idea is to learn how PMCs work, which is much
> > > easier done when you are participating, rather than just lurking and
> > > occasionally voting.
> > >
> > > - As far as process goes, I'd like to just follow Noel's suggestion
> > > below and have the mentors vote in the PPMC members. As one of the
> > > mentors, I've described how I will vote above. I'd be interested in
> > > hearing whether the other mentors have concerns or a completely
> > > different idea. Otherwise, I'd suggest that each committer consider
> > > my comments above and then nominate yourself if you still feel you
> > > want to/should be on the PPMC.
> > >
> > > Cliff
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/13/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > here's the question:
> > >>
> > >> > should every committer automatically be a member of the PPMC?
> > >>
> > >> > Or should only a smaller set of committers (the people most
> > >> > directly responsible for most of the existing work to date)
> > >> > be on the PPMC until they vote to bring in others?
> > >>
> > >> > My personal opinion is that every committer should be on the PPMC so
> > >> > that they better understand and have the opportunity to play a part
> > >> > in that aspect of Apache.
> > >>
> > >> > However, I think the other point of view is quite reasonable (which I
> > >> > believe is held by the chair of the Incubator, Noel Bergman).
> > >>
> > >> Actually, I really don't care. What I have said is that
> > >> structurally, the
> > >> initial PPMC consists of the mentors, and we bootstrap: they vote on
> > >> whom
> > >> they feel should belong on the PPMC. Whether that is a few people or
> > >> everyone isn't my concern. My issue is purely procedural, leaving the
> > >> policy in the hands of each set of Mentors.
> > >>
> > >> Now, technically, any vote effecting the ASF (new Commmitter or Release)
> > >> counts only votes from the PMC, which is why the Incubator PMC needs
> > >> to be
> > >> informed of the vote, and why I keep pushing to have at least three (3)
> > >> Mentors per project, so that each can more easily muster sufficient
> > >> votes.
> > >>
> > >> I hope that my position is clearer now.
> > >>
> > >> --- Noel
> >
> >
>
--
Paul Fremantle
VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
--
Paul Fremantle
VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
--
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
