Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0). Isn't this easy to solve? All we need is for one proposed PMC-member to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership. Is anyone willing to state this? Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that the Board chooses to make. +1 ...and I think we no longer need to string this thread out. (IMHO) Regards, Dave -Rob Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
Sent from my tablet On Oct 12, 2012 6:29 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: ... As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. Actually the observation was that there's only one Member. The motivation behind this concern is twofold (note this is my interpretation, not necessarily the view of the person asking the question): This is a large and complex project that is requiring the ASF to adapt in many areas and resist other changes. Therefore the Membership needs to be in agreement about foundational issues. The lack of members on the PMC means might be limited early visibility into upcoming foundational issues. Secondly, this is a large and complex project that would benefit a great deal from the ongoing support of ASF Members from a community perspective. I, and other mentors voted +1 on the recommendation so clearly we believe that the PPMC is in good shape. But it doesn't yet have deep roots in the Apache Way. This is not about the health of the PPMC it is about the need for guidance (for example, I like to think I'm pretty much in control of my own affairs but I still bounce things to my life coach occasionally). However, graduating doesn't remove access to mentoring, it just changes the role of those mentors. These things need to be remembered by the community as a whole. In particular members need to ensure that they actively engage with the ASF and use the support and guidance available to ensure AOO continues to develop healthily. Personaly, I see a problem that needs to be managed but not one that should slow graduation. Hopefully this will be the last time I speak with an official mentor hat on ;) Ross Regards, Andrea.
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
Sent from my tablet On Oct 13, 2012 11:00 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: ?.. It never occurred to me that any of them would have necessarily been interested. The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. I would have thought all of your active mentors have earned sufficient merit and should have been invited to join. Furthermore, at least on mentor indicated a desire to serve on the PMC, so there was no need for it to occur to anyone, it was explicit. This is the first time I've seen a PPMC fail nominate its active mentors as PMC members. There is a lesson in there for the community but it is no longer my place to convey what I think that lesson is (since my last mail was my last as a mentor) Ross
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote: Sent from my tablet On Oct 13, 2012 11:00 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: ?.. It never occurred to me that any of them would have necessarily been interested. The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. I would have thought Actually, I explicitly mentioned this, and more than once, in the earlier phase of this process. -Rob all of your active mentors have earned sufficient merit and should have been invited to join. Furthermore, at least on mentor indicated a desire to serve on the PMC, so there was no need for it to occur to anyone, it was explicit. This is the first time I've seen a PPMC fail nominate its active mentors as PMC members. There is a lesson in there for the community but it is no longer my place to convey what I think that lesson is (since my last mail was my last as a mentor) Ross
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0). Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina pgpkxlhHtoeLA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0). Isn't this easy to solve? All we need is for one proposed PMC-member to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership. Is anyone willing to state this? -Rob Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
Yes, it's easily resolved, Dave already indicated the three ways it might be resolved. Like I said its more of a lesson to be learned than a reason to delay. Awareness of the issue is enough for now. Ross Sent from mobile, forgive terseness and errors On Oct 14, 2012 5:55 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0). Isn't this easy to solve? All we need is for one proposed PMC-member to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership. Is anyone willing to state this? Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that the Board chooses to make. Regards, Dave -Rob Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0). Isn't this easy to solve? All we need is for one proposed PMC-member to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership. Is anyone willing to state this? Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that the Board chooses to make. Great. Personally I think it makes sense for the PMC to manage its own evolution. This is a non-trivial part of The Apache Way. I realize that the ASF Board has the ability in extraordinary situations to intervene directly in a PMC's decision making process. As a last resort and a blunt instrument are the terms I recall being used earlier in reference to Board intervention. It will be very interesting to see if they think this is a situation that warrants such action. -Rob Regards, Dave -Rob Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
Sent from my tablet On Oct 14, 2012 9:18 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote: On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile arie...@apache.org wrote: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0). Isn't this easy to solve? All we need is for one proposed PMC-member to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership. Is anyone willing to state this? Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that the Board chooses to make. Great. Personally I think it makes sense for the PMC to manage its own evolution. This is a non-trivial part of The Apache Way. I realize that the ASF Board has the ability in extraordinary situations to intervene directly in a PMC's decision making process. As a last resort and a blunt instrument are the terms I recall being used earlier in reference to Board intervention. It will be very interesting to see if they think this is a situation that warrants such action. Please don't quote things out of context, it doesn't help. Changing a resolution is not an extraordinary situation, its part of the board's responsibility to the foundation. The PMC I currently chair, for example, had a couple of relevant and appropriate people added by the board before creation. That being said, I am not suggesting the board will take such an action, I cannot predict the actions of a board of 9. I will observe, that a concern has been raised and the reactions of this community to those concerns has been, on the whole, appreciative and appropriate (and I don't mean only Dave's statement above, in fact I dont think that is necessary). Ross -Rob Regards, Dave -Rob Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Rob Weir wrote: Also, there are some administrative steps that we'll need to take care of over the weekend, assuming the IPMC vote passes: 1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these instructions: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday. I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone Exactly. Actually, both tasks are rather trivial, it will just need precise timing as others explained. But it won't be a problem for me to take care of it in about 24 hours. As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with other areas of Apache: 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press and Communications. 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon planning. 3) Andrew, Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many things. There may be others. 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis. This includes raising questions and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what they have learned as well. 5) Dave is involved with POI. Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of the ODF Toolkit. I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a new BeanShell project proposal. 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved coordinating with ASF Treasurer. So I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave is active in more than just the OO project. -Rob Regards, Andrea.
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
- Original Message - From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org ... As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with other areas of Apache: 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press and Communications. 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon planning. 3) Andrew, Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many things. There may be others. 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis. This includes raising questions and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what they have learned as well. 5) Dave is involved with POI. Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of the ODF Toolkit. I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a new BeanShell project proposal. 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved coordinating with ASF Treasurer. So I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave is active in more than just the OO project. The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included some of our mentors in the PMC. This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC: we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when it was absolutely necessary. This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay us too much. Pedro.
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Oct 13, 2012, at 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org ... As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with other areas of Apache: 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press and Communications. Don's efforts are visible. 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon planning. 3) Andrew, Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many things. There may be others. imacat as well. All are visible. 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis. This includes raising questions and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what they have learned as well. 5) Dave is involved with POI. I was the exception that Bertrand was aware of - we are both Mentors to Apache Flex and I'm the only Member on the PMC. Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of the ODF Toolkit. I am glad to see your recent attention to ODFToolkit where you are also a PPMC member. I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a new BeanShell project proposal. I haven't seen that in the Incubator yet. 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved coordinating with ASF Treasurer. So I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave is active in more than just the OO project. The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included some of our mentors in the PMC. I agree. This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC: we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when it was absolutely necessary. There are several ways this may be fixed in no particular order or evaluation of likelihood. (A) The Board might add PMC members. (B) The new PMC might VOTE for new PMC members. (C) Some PMC members might be elected Apache Members at the next Members meeting. Only one of the above (B) is something that may be controlled by the PMC. This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay us too much. I don't see a delay happening. Let's be patient for the next few days. Best Regards, Dave Pedro.
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On 13/10/2012 Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Rob Weir wrote: 1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list The 72 hours just expired and I've taken care of both steps. So everything to be done on our (PPMC) side is done. It's up to the Board now to accept our resolution in their agenda and to vote on it at their next meeting. So I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave is active in more than just the OO project. The observation was then clarified to the idea that we could keep more mentors on board. Anyway, no discussion sparked from it, so it's not delaying our graduation and it wasn't raised as a formal obstacle to graduation. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org ... As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with other areas of Apache: 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press and Communications. 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon planning. 3) Andrew, Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many things. There may be others. 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis. This includes raising questions and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what they have learned as well. 5) Dave is involved with POI. Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of the ODF Toolkit. I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a new BeanShell project proposal. 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved coordinating with ASF Treasurer. So I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave is active in more than just the OO project. The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included some of our mentors in the PMC. This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC: we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when it was absolutely necessary. Once we graduate this role will be played by the ASF Board. They keep a low profile and intervene in projects only when absolutely necessary. This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay us too much. Pedro.
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Weir robw...@apache.org ... As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with other areas of Apache: 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press and Communications. 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon planning. 3) Andrew, Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many things. There may be others. 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis. This includes raising questions and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what they have learned as well. 5) Dave is involved with POI. Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of the ODF Toolkit. I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a new BeanShell project proposal. 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved coordinating with ASF Treasurer. So I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave is active in more than just the OO project. The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included some of our mentors in the PMC. It never occurred to me that any of them would have necessarily been interested. It seemed curious to me that this should be pointed out actually, but I have no former experience in how initial PMCs are established. Maybe it was mostly a concern due to our size and the extent of our activities. We have the roles thread that Oliver started a while back that should be documented on the planning wiki, and see if we've forgotten anything, or want to document these activities more in depth. As for me, I'm happy to see that Dave Fisher is included, and I'm sure we can rely on him for advice, etc. This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC: we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when it was absolutely necessary. This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay us too much. Pedro. -- MzK Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat. -- Robert Heinlein
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On 12/10/2012 15:52, Rob Weir wrote: 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these instructions: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday. I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone else if he is unavailable on Saturday. Remember that this needs to hit board@ by Sunday to be included in the agenda for Wednesday, so if there's no ack by midnight Saturday by Andrea that it's been dealt with, a backup voulenteer would probably be a smart thing :) Issac
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Issac Goldstand is...@volo-net.com wrote: On 12/10/2012 15:52, Rob Weir wrote: 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these instructions: http://incubator.apache.org/**guides/graduation.html#top-* *level-board-proposalhttp://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday. I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone else if he is unavailable on Saturday. Remember that this needs to hit board@ by Sunday to be included in the agenda for Wednesday, so if there's no ack by midnight Saturday by Andrea that it's been dealt with, a backup voulenteer would probably be a smart thing :) Issac @Rob...yes, we should not get ahead of ourselves. The Board's decision at the board meeting is the definitive one that will establish OpenOffice as a TLP. @Isaac...a backup would be a good idea and this person needs to be a current PPMC member. As an FYI, a template for submission to the Board is available on the Graduation page http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#process -- MzK Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat. -- Robert Heinlein
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
Rob Weir wrote: Also, there are some administrative steps that we'll need to take care of over the weekend, assuming the IPMC vote passes: 1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these instructions: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday. I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone Exactly. Actually, both tasks are rather trivial, it will just need precise timing as others explained. But it won't be a problem for me to take care of it in about 24 hours. As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Oct 12, 2012, at 9:02 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Issac Goldstand is...@volo-net.com wrote: On 12/10/2012 15:52, Rob Weir wrote: 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these instructions: http://incubator.apache.org/**guides/graduation.html#top-* *level-board-proposalhttp://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday. I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone else if he is unavailable on Saturday. Remember that this needs to hit board@ by Sunday to be included in the agenda for Wednesday, so if there's no ack by midnight Saturday by Andrea that it's been dealt with, a backup voulenteer would probably be a smart thing :) Issac @Rob...yes, we should not get ahead of ourselves. The Board's decision at the board meeting is the definitive one that will establish OpenOffice as a TLP. @Isaac...a backup would be a good idea and this person needs to be a current PPMC member. As an FYI, a template for submission to the Board is available on the Graduation page http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#process That page may not be the exact.. The Incubator lists podlings for graduation on the Incubator's Board Report. (This is discussed on private @ i.a.o.) Please ask on general @ i.a.o if any further action is required by this PPMC to put the resolution on the board agenda once the VOTE passes. Regards, Dave -- MzK Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat. -- Robert Heinlein
Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers
On Oct 12, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Rob Weir wrote: Also, there are some administrative steps that we'll need to take care of over the weekend, assuming the IPMC vote passes: 1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these instructions: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday. I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone Exactly. Actually, both tasks are rather trivial, it will just need precise timing as others explained. But it won't be a problem for me to take care of it in about 24 hours. As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from them so far. The observation was from a board member. Three of the project mentors are also board members. Joe voted +1 after Bertrand's remark. Regards, Dave Regards, Andrea.
