management of the PMC roster (was: Re: [VOTE] sourceresolver 2.2.2 release)

[Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>]

On Apr 10, 2007, at 6:20 PM, Jorg Heymans wrote:
> (is there anything the PMC can do to make it easier to vote a  
> release through - perhaps get a few cocoon developers on the PMC ?)

Adding people to a PMC involves

   (1) calling for a vote on private@excalibur
   (2) people voting
   (3) tallying the vote
   (4) inviting the new people
   (5) chair sending an email to board@
       (6) board ACKs
           (7) chair updates a file in SVN

"get a few cocoon developers on the PMC" is slightly off, since we  
add people to the PMC based on merit. Of course, there are probably  
quite a few developers out there who have earned sufficient merit to  
be on the excalibur PMC, and some of them probably also are cocoon  
developers. The way I see it, the open invitation extended to them a  
year or two ago is still pretty much open, we just need to do the  
voting :-).

Before setting up excalibur, we did discuss with a bunch of people  
whether some stuff should just move out into cocoon. Back then, we  
decided against it.

Another related thing to do is removing people from the PMC that no  
longer want to be on it. This involves

   (1) that PMC member sending an email to private@excalibur  
requesting to be removed from the PMC
   (5) chair sending an email to board@
       (6) board ACKs
           (7) chair updates a file in SVN

there is an alternative here when (1) does not happen which is a lot  
less fun (the rest of the PMC has to vote to remove the inactive  
member).

(on a tangent: excalibur is one example of several mature, stable,  
and pretty inactive projects at apache. As a foundation, apache has  
not yet really figured out a 'standard way' on how to deal with  
projects with dwindling activity, so in the meantime it's up to each  
project to figure out what to do.)

cheers,

- Leo


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org

Re: management of the PMC roster

[J Aaron Farr <fa...@apache.org>]

Jorg Heymans <jh...@apache.org> writes:

> Would reducing the number of required PMC votes for a release be an
> option in such case ? Or is this cemented in the ASF legalese
> somewhere?

 Pretty cemented.

-- 
  jaaron
 




  

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org

Re: management of the PMC roster

[Jorg Heymans <jh...@apache.org>]

Leo Simons wrote:

>> (is there anything the PMC can do to make it easier to vote a release 
>> through - perhaps get a few cocoon developers on the PMC ?)
> 
> Adding people to a PMC involves
> 
>   (1) calling for a vote on private@excalibur
>   (2) people voting
>   (3) tallying the vote
>   (4) inviting the new people
>   (5) chair sending an email to board@
>       (6) board ACKs
>           (7) chair updates a file in SVN
> 
> "get a few cocoon developers on the PMC" is slightly off, since we add 
> people to the PMC based on merit. Of course, there are probably quite a 
> few developers out there who have earned sufficient merit to be on the 
> excalibur PMC, and some of them probably also are cocoon developers. The 
> way I see it, the open invitation extended to them a year or two ago is 
> still pretty much open, we just need to do the voting :-).

ofcourse my wording was very much off, but i'm glad it at least sparked 
a flurry of reactions. I was under the (biased) impression that cocoon 
was the only project still actively caring about new features and bug 
fixes, I'm happy to see that's not the case.

> (on a tangent: excalibur is one example of several mature, stable, and 
> pretty inactive projects at apache. As a foundation, apache has not yet 
> really figured out a 'standard way' on how to deal with projects with 
> dwindling activity, so in the meantime it's up to each project to figure 
> out what to do.)

Would reducing the number of required PMC votes for a release be an 
option in such case ? Or is this cemented in the ASF legalese somewhere?


Jorg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org

Re: management of the PMC roster (was: Re: [VOTE] sourceresolver 2.2.2 release)

[J Aaron Farr <fa...@apache.org>]

On 4/11/07, Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com> wrote:

> "get a few cocoon developers on the PMC" is slightly off, since we
> add people to the PMC based on merit. Of course, there are probably
> quite a few developers out there who have earned sufficient merit to
> be on the excalibur PMC, and some of them probably also are cocoon
> developers. The way I see it, the open invitation extended to them a
> year or two ago is still pretty much open, we just need to do the
> voting :-).

Agreed.  My concern is that, while we have enough active PMC members
to get a release out (slowly) I doubt we could get a quorum of the PMC
together to do much else.

> (on a tangent: excalibur is one example of several mature, stable,
> and pretty inactive projects at apache. As a foundation, apache has
> not yet really figured out a 'standard way' on how to deal with
> projects with dwindling activity, so in the meantime it's up to each
> project to figure out what to do.)

For any "stable" projects one goal should be to make it easy to still
get a release out without dropping the oversight ball.  In Excalibur's
case, the involves getting those actually doing releases on the PMC.

And as for the current release vote, I just have not had time to look
at it.  I'm very sorry.  I'll see what I can do right now...

-- 
  jaaron

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@excalibur.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@excalibur.apache.org