On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> > Bear in mind that is -this- is the number one aim - we can do
> > that without a PMC
> no, we can't. please see roy's several messages on this subject.
Perhals not with our current bylaws. But that can be changed.
It is a matter of how on
Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/management.html
thank you.
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
I'm planning on submitting a proposal to change the bylaws
of Jakarta to bring Jakarta's PMC structure closer to the
HTTPD one.
btw, sam, where are the current bylaws? or do they go by another
name?
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/management.html
- Sam
Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> I'm planning on submitting a proposal to change the bylaws
> of Jakarta to bring Jakarta's PMC structure closer to the
> HTTPD one.
btw, sam, where are the current bylaws? or do they go by another
name?
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 06:51:04PM +0100, Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>...
> Now if this would be all - no worries. However I personally think that the
> transition from that one HTTP crowd to one for HTTP, one for APR, etc, etc
> was already showing that something is a bit amiss in the scaling; e
At 10:26 04.11.2002 -0800, Costin Manolache wrote:
If someone is active in jakarta he probably has all the reasons to
be active in the PMC as well - because most issues will affect him.
Not necessarily. I am not in my town's municipality although many
things that the municipality decides affect me
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>
> On 4 Nov 2002, Costin Manolache wrote:
>
> > The protection of the PMC matters the most for those
> > who actually write code and actively participate in jakarta.
>
> Bear in mind that is -this- is the number one aim - we can do
> that without a PMC
no, we can'
On 4 Nov 2002, Costin Manolache wrote:
> The protection of the PMC matters the most for those who actually write
> code and actively participate in jakarta.
Bear in mind that is -this- is the number one aim - we can do that without
a PMC and simply start tracking committers better; or even wid
I partially agree with Dirk's opinion. A very large PMC where people
don't feel a direct need to participate is wrong.
That's the reason I think 'active participants who volunteer for PMC'
is the right solution. If someone doesn't feel 'active' in jakarta or
doesn't have the time or wish to act
I do agree with every point of the proposal - but I can't be fully +1
until the non-normative guidelines are well defined.
I believe everyone who is actively developing code and participate in
jakarta should have the option ( and be encouraged ) to be in the
jakarta PMC.
That's the goal ( IMO
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> >
> > And I do think it is; as a PMC of a hundred members will
> > never act quicker or more focused/quick as a group of 5-10
> > people recruited out of those 100 who have a task (say
> > investigate a license is
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>
> And I do think it is; as a PMC of a hundred members will
> never act quicker or more focused/quick as a group of 5-10
> people recruited out of those 100 who have a task (say
> investigate a license issue) and know that there are
> a 100 people looking at them to g
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 03:52:17AM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
> I'm planning on submitting a proposal to change the bylaws of Jakarta to
> bring Jakarta's PMC structure closer to the HTTPD one. Before I do so,
> I would like to gather the opinions of a self selecting cross section of
> both Jakarta
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Can you tell me what's wrong with a PMC which is almost silent, is
> composed by committers and manages just one codebase? sounds like an
> ideal situation for a PMC.
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>
>>I fundamentally believe that the HTTP PMC model is flawed in
>>its current form; and simply generates another 'layer' and a
>>weird birthday cake.
>
>oh, ah? reminds me of 'democracy is
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> > I fundamentally believe that the HTTP PMC model is flawed in
> > its current form; and simply generates another 'layer' and a
> > weird birthday cake.
>
> oh, ah? reminds me of 'democracy is the worst system of
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
>
> I fundamentally believe that the HTTP PMC model is flawed in
> its current form; and simply generates another 'layer' and a
> weird birthday cake.
oh, ah? reminds me of 'democracy is the worst system of government
-- excepting all the others'. :-)
> By simply '
On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Sam Ruby wrote:
> I'm planning on submitting a proposal to change the bylaws of Jakarta to
Now this seems an excelent idea to address the immediate and short term
issues around oversight and management.
However I am not sure if this is a good idea in the long run.
I fundam
It smells like a pretty good idea to me.
One question thoughdo you ever sleep? (3:52AM)?
Sam Ruby wrote:
I'm planning on submitting a proposal to change the bylaws of Jakarta
to bring Jakarta's PMC structure closer to the HTTPD one. Before I do
so, I would like to gather the opinions of a s
Sam Ruby wrote:
Thoughts?
+1 to all items.
I think this will help to address the oversight, legal and management issues
that have been raised for the short term. It gives us time for any reorg (is
that a dirty word on this list?) to occur as subprojects desire it, without
having these issues ov
I'm planning on submitting a proposal to change the bylaws of Jakarta to
bring Jakarta's PMC structure closer to the HTTPD one. Before I do so,
I would like to gather the opinions of a self selecting cross section of
both Jakarta and non-Jakarta committers, and it occurs to me that this
mailin
21 matches
Mail list logo
