Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Unless I am mistaken, being a PMC member implies an overseing role for the
whole of jakarta,
No, not quite, IMHO. The PMC as a *whole* has an oversight role for the
whole of Jakarta but individual PMC members do not need to oversee all of
Jakarta. In fact this is the
Conor MacNeill wrote:
purely PMC role. All releases of Jakarta sub-projects must be approved by
the PMC. This isn't something that has been done in Jakarta to date,
One good first step in this direction would be to at least Cc: the pmc
list on all [Vote result] messages, so all pmc should be
Jeffrey Dever wrote:
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases to
the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for Commons
HttpClient where all committers vote on all issues all the time,
including releases. HttpClient is somewhat unusual in commons as
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases
to the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for
Commons HttpClient where all committers vote on all issues all the
time, including releases. HttpClient is somewhat unusual in commons
as it is rather a
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Jeffrey Dever wrote:
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases
to the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for
Commons HttpClient where all committers vote on all issues all the
time,
--- Jeffrey Dever [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members
voting on releases
to the exclusion of active committers. I'm the
release prime for
Commons HttpClient where all committers vote on
all issues all the
time, including releases.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
The goal is to make all active committers PMC members.
Would it be quicker just to make all active committers PMC members by
default?
If the idea is that every release-manager
If the implication is that release management =
project management, I don't agree. Typically there
can only be one release manager, but it's takes lots
of people to keep a project going. Certainly every
release manager should forward themselves as PMC
nominees, but the body of qualified
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Jeffrey Dever wrote:
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases
to the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for
Commons HttpClient where all committers vote
Jeffrey Dever wrote:
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases to
the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for Commons
It is not to the exclusion of active committers.
Http-client is part of jakarta-commons - and acording to the charter any
On Tuesday, February 18, 2003, at 11:42 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Yesterday I received the Jakarta Monthly Newsletter. Interesting as
always,
until I got to the section on PMC nominations. There, I suddenly found my
name listed as elected to the Jakarta PMC. This came as a complete
It is not to the exclusion of active committers.
Http-client is part of jakarta-commons - and acording to the charter any
jakarta-commons committer ( which is close to all jakarta ) can vote.
As you probably know - only those who are really interested do that.
I agree that we're not yet ready
Completely agree. We should see what the new PMC roles/responsibilites
are before accepting PMC membership.
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On Tuesday, February 18, 2003, at 11:42 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Yesterday I received the Jakarta Monthly Newsletter. Interesting as
always,
until I
robert burrell donkin wrote:
actively inviting new PMC members to join is something that i think
should be done.
in the same way that a developer receives a letter from apache (after a
successful vote) inviting them to become a committer, i'd say that
committers who have been voted onto the
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 02:19 PM, Costin Manolache wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:18 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Jeffrey Dever wrote:
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases
to the exclusion of active committers.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Shouldn't it be that a committer has been around for a reasonable amount
of time? How else would they be a committer?
From the perspective of other ASF projects (e.g., HTTPD), Jakarta gives
out committer-ship like candy. With HTTPD, a track record of
approximately
On 19/2/03 17:18 Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeffrey Dever wrote:
I am not excited by the idea of only PMC members voting on releases to
the exclusion of active committers. I'm the release prime for Commons
HttpClient where all committers vote on all issues all the time,
including
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 03:41 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Shouldn't it be that a committer has been around for a reasonable
amount of time? How else would they be a committer?
From the perspective of other ASF projects (e.g., HTTPD), Jakarta
gives out
At 15:41 19.02.2003 -0500, you wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Shouldn't it be that a committer has been around for a reasonable amount
of time? How else would they be a committer?
From the perspective of other ASF projects (e.g., HTTPD), Jakarta gives
out committer-ship like candy. With
At 19:26 13.02.2003 -0500, you wrote:
Charles Burdick wrote:
Selection criteria aside, I nominate Morgan for the PMC.
Now that I think of it, let me just skim through the
Jakarta-Announcements archive from various points last year.
- Danny Angus
- Peter Carlson
- Morgan Delagrange
- Pier
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 19/2/03 17:18 Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The goal is to make all active committers PMC members.
I think this is utterly wrong for an umbrella project like Jakarta.
Interesting. 100% of the ASF board members that I have talked to have
given me exactly the
hi ceki
wouldn't it be less confusing to have a separate vote for mark?
while i'm thinking about it, is general or pmc the right place for votes
of this kind?
- robert
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 09:15 PM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
At 19:26 13.02.2003 -0500, you wrote:
Charles Burdick
One good first step in this direction would be to at least Cc: the pmc
list on all [Vote result] messages, so all pmc should be aware of
the decisions made.
It is important to emphasize *result*. Not to be discouraging but you
could quickly overwhelm the PMC with threads of discussion
Talk less. Nominate more.
-Andy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Robert,
I think Mark's nomination follows the sprit set by Sam's initial note.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-generalm=104275438831116w=2
As such, I don't see a need for a separate vote.
At 22:16 19.02.2003 +, you wrote:
hi ceki
wouldn't it be less confusing to have a
Nominating like this seems counter-productive. At least in the spirit it
usually occurs. ie) lots of +1's thrown about on the list etc. It'll be a
nightmare.
Why not just go into a nomination phase in which someone [I'm happy to do
this if need be] collates a list of nominations, and then the
Henri Yandell wrote:
Just a view against the 'jump right in and nominate a person at a time'
idea.
+1
FYI: My preference is for monthly batches. My aim was to complete each
batch in time for the board meeting, but this one went astray...
Suggestion: let's call this round complete at this
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 10:25 PM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
Hi Robert,
I think Mark's nomination follows the sprit set by Sam's initial note.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=jakarta-generalm=104275438831116w=2
As such, I don't see a need for a separate vote.
my reasoning was purely
Hi peeps,
I am on the avalon PMC. I was a bit scared of the idea of being a PMC
member at first, thinking about all the additional responsibility and
all the additional things I would need to do.
Guess what? No need for that at all! The additional responsibility
being on a PMC entails wasn't
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
So, unless this:
The PMC is responsible for the strategic direction and success of the Jakarta
Project. This governing body is expected to ensure the project's welfare and
guide its overall direction.
Changes to identify that individual PMC members might have oversight
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
By the way, when are the next membership nominations?
Martin Poeschl wrote:
how does someone become an ASF member?
i know, by nomination from another member .. but when does that ever
happen??
This is scheduled to coincide with members meetings which, in turn, are
On 19/2/03 21:31 Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 19/2/03 17:18 Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The goal is to make all active committers PMC members.
I think this is utterly wrong for an umbrella project like Jakarta.
Interesting. 100% of the ASF board
On 19/2/03 23:00 Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guess what? No need for that at all! The additional responsibility
being on a PMC entails wasn't additional at all.
Avalon is ONE project... Jakarta, I can't count them with my hands AND feet.
Pier
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 19/2/03 21:31 Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not a convincing enough argument to make me change my point of view.
Pier
Fair enough.
I think it is fair to interpret the paragraph you quoted
The PMC is responsible for the strategic direction and
On 20/2/03 2:34 Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A bit like
saying the government is responsible for running the country. That doesn't
mean every minister will have expertise in every portfolio
Ministers might not know the details, but know the overall direction and
actions of all the
I would like to nominate the following committers from the Commons
HttpClient project to the PMC. They are all very active and have been
for many months. There are other committers that could be nominated,
but the following are those whose primary association to Jakarta is
through
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
...
Now, under Jakarta, there might be projects on which one might like to be
involved and spend time on (therefore bearing the responsibilities of
being a PMC member over _that_ particular code base), but there might be
project that one don't want to be even remotely
37 matches
Mail list logo
