You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au> on 2003/01/30 12:27:13 UTC
Bylaws duplication
Hi all,
It seems that I too was under the impression that the incubator project
would be providing the documentation on the "Apache Way". AIUI, Incubator
would not only serve to help new projects develop the Apache way of doing
things, it would serve as the definitive reference for all other projects.
Sander has raised the possibility that this may not be the case.
Nevertheless, with the promotion of a number of new top level projects, the
new PMCs are all required to come up with Bylaws for the management of their
projects. IMHO, the bylaws for all these projects should be largely the
same, since they all support the operation of what is known as the Apache
Way. If the projects develop them independently, as is happening now, we
will come to similar but perhaps subtly different interpretations of the
Apache Way. Also being indepedently maintained, these differences can grow
over time.
Let me propose a few questions to see if there is consensus:
1. Should there be a common set of bylaws to govern all Apache projects.
Individual projects could apply amendments, if necessary, to provide for
their own requirements. For example, Incubator itself may have unique rules
for project adoption decisions, etc.
2. If there should be a common set of bylaws, where should it be maintained?
Should it live in Incubator or somwhere else. If so, where do you think?
As part of the Ant PMC establishment process, I have developed a draft set
of bylaws. The Ant PMC is currently considering these. I think the Avalon
PMC is also working on this (I think they are probably adopting a quite
different approach).
Anyway, I can contribute my draft if there is consensus to do that here.
Cheers
Conor
Re: Bylaws duplication
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Conor MacNeill wrote:
> Let me propose a few questions to see if there is consensus:
>
> 1. Should there be a common set of bylaws to govern all Apache projects.
> Individual projects could apply amendments, if necessary, to provide for
> their own requirements. For example, Incubator itself may have unique
> rules for project adoption decisions, etc.
I think so.
> 2. If there should be a common set of bylaws, where should it be
> maintained? Should it live in Incubator or somwhere else. If so, where
> do you think?
I think it would be good to have it @ incubator. My reasoning is that
when incubator sends a project on to live on its own, it would be nice
to have some "boilerplate" to base any kind of charter on. Similarly,
the new PMCs would like such a boilerplate but it doesn't really exist :D
> As part of the Ant PMC establishment process, I have developed a draft
> set of bylaws. The Ant PMC is currently considering these. I think the
> Avalon PMC is also working on this (I think they are probably adopting a
> quite different approach).
we're working on this stuff, slowly but steadily. We've had talks about
the role of the PMC, basically building understanding about what the PMC
should and should not do amongst ourselves (and in good dialogue with
board peeps and asf veterans). We've just (finally!) got ourselves an
agreement on how we want to handle PMC voting (the text is not online
yet, but you can look at the avalon-dev archives; search for "PMC:VOTE",
or just "PMC" in the subject for all the discussion that led to the text).
We've also gotten a draft charter in cvs at jakarta-avalon/src/proposal
(it's been stale for a few weeks now....lots of things to do :D).
One thing I took away from conversation between Greg & Sam and avalon
peeps (some of this on the avalon PMC list and thus not publicly
archived I guess) is that it isn't really neccessary to be real formal
about things like charter and bylaws; those things have mostly
informational purpose. They serve as reference for agreements between
the community members on how to "do their thing", as an indication to
other peeps (like users, other asf projects and the board) about where
the project is heading, etc etc.
IOW, there is no particular legal or ASF-steered organisational need for
detailed bylaws. What really matters there are the actual *actions*
undertaken by the ASF and its various organisational bodies and people,
the board minutes, the official ASF bylaws, the ASF license, and any
official activity by the ASF members (like electing the board I guess,
but I dunno about all that as I'm not a member).
So the goal with a charter/bylaws/project guidelines is basically to
define what your project is for, where it is heading (focussing can be
real difficult ;), and how you want to do that within the apache spirit
of consensus-oriented development. It is probably fruitless to define
the "where" here, but we can certainly do the "how" once and then just
incorporate by reference.
Avalon's been primarily working to get some consensus about which
direction the community wants to take our project (y'all probably know
avalon has gone in various directions over the years). The process is
going rather well even without a reference charter in place. When we get
our noses aligned again, I guess that's when the "where" will be written
up, too.
> Anyway, I can contribute my draft if there is consensus to do that here.
I'd definately like to see it. I'll also try and get the attention of
other avalon peeps so we can maybe get some creative juices flowing over
here.
Regardless, I think it would be nice to have some talks about the whole
"PMC thing" so many of us are new to. We can have those talks here or
over @ community@apache I guess. I'll find some time to try and share
some experiences so far.
cheers,
- Leo
Re: Bylaws duplication
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Sander Striker wrote:
>>From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:jim@apache.org]
>>Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 7:14 PM
>
>
>>At 10:27 PM +1100 1/30/03, Conor MacNeill wrote:
>>
>>>Hi all,
>>>
>>>It seems that I too was under the impression that the incubator
>>>project would be providing the documentation on the "Apache Way".
>>>AIUI, Incubator would not only serve to help new projects develop
>>>the Apache way of doing things, it would serve as the definitive
>>>reference for all other projects. Sander has raised the possibility
>>>that this may not be the case.
>
>
> Hold on there. I was pointing out that our current infrastructural
> related things that committers should be aware of are currently
> documented at http://www.apache.org/dev/. I wanted to keep stuff
> about cvs together with the other stuff about cvs. If our Incubator
> site is done either the pages on that subject move here, or will
> be linked to. We can decide on that when the time is right.
Exactly, I've come to agree on this too. The best thing is to start to
gather all information here at least as links, and later eventually
integrate the docs in a single one with the help of the original page
maintainers.
> Bylaws however are an entirely different beast... I don't feel
> any different from what Jim wrote in his response.
And the same rule applies here.
New PMCs have come up with interesting variations of some PMC rules, so
we could do the same as with other resources and link to them from here.
Then make boilerplates, or even concurrently with the links, and narrow
down to a personalized one later.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Bylaws duplication
Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>.
Sander Striker wrote:
>
> Hold on there. I was pointing out that our current infrastructural
> related things that committers should be aware of are currently
> documented at http://www.apache.org/dev/. I wanted to keep stuff
> about cvs together with the other stuff about cvs. If our Incubator
> site is done either the pages on that subject move here, or will
> be linked to. We can decide on that when the time is right.
OK, cool. It wasn't obvious to me the boundaries when I read your other emails.
For those who are interested, the draft Ant bylaws are available from CVS
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-ant/proposal/ant-site/anakia/docs/bylaws.html
You should be able to get an HTML checkout from there directly in your
browser. I have only recently asked the Ant PMC to review these, so they do
not yet have the benefit of that feedback. I've tried to keep things simple
while covering the essentials of how Apache works. I would certainly welcome
feedback (whether additions or corrections) from this list and other PMCs.
Thanks
Conor
RE: Bylaws duplication
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:jim@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 7:14 PM
> At 10:27 PM +1100 1/30/03, Conor MacNeill wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> It seems that I too was under the impression that the incubator
>> project would be providing the documentation on the "Apache Way".
>> AIUI, Incubator would not only serve to help new projects develop
>> the Apache way of doing things, it would serve as the definitive
>> reference for all other projects. Sander has raised the possibility
>> that this may not be the case.
Hold on there. I was pointing out that our current infrastructural
related things that committers should be aware of are currently
documented at http://www.apache.org/dev/. I wanted to keep stuff
about cvs together with the other stuff about cvs. If our Incubator
site is done either the pages on that subject move here, or will
be linked to. We can decide on that when the time is right.
Bylaws however are an entirely different beast... I don't feel
any different from what Jim wrote in his response.
Sander
Re: Bylaws duplication
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@apache.org>.
At 10:27 PM +1100 1/30/03, Conor MacNeill wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>It seems that I too was under the impression that the incubator project would be providing the documentation on the "Apache Way". AIUI, Incubator would not only serve to help new projects develop the Apache way of doing things, it would serve as the definitive reference for all other projects. Sander has raised the possibility that this may not be the case.
>
>Nevertheless, with the promotion of a number of new top level projects, the new PMCs are all required to come up with Bylaws for the management of their projects. IMHO, the bylaws for all these projects should be largely the same, since they all support the operation of what is known as the Apache Way. If the projects develop them independently, as is happening now, we will come to similar but perhaps subtly different interpretations of the Apache Way. Also being indepedently maintained, these differences can grow over time.
>
This was actually discussed somewhat at the board meeting. The general
thought was that, yes, the Incubator would be a good place to create
and store a sort of Bylaws Boilerplate, which includes the salient
features/requirements yet provides room for personalization.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order
will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
Re: Bylaws duplication
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Serge Knystautas wrote:
...
> As the chair of the newly formed James PMC, we would very much welcome
> some standard bylaws to build on. I don't know where these should be
> maintained since I'm not aware of who in the ASF maintains existing
> bylaws. btw, in the meantime if you'd be willing to share the bylaws
> you're considering, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
I'd suggest you to share with the other PMCs what they have done so far
and check with us for eventual clarifications and suggestion requests.
The PMCs have a deeper knowledge of the needs of their community, and I
don't want to have them use boilerplates right away. Basically you are
helping us :-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Bylaws duplication
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Conor MacNeill wrote:
> Let me propose a few questions to see if there is consensus:
>
> 1. Should there be a common set of bylaws to govern all Apache projects.
> Individual projects could apply amendments, if necessary, to provide for
> their own requirements. For example, Incubator itself may have unique
> rules for project adoption decisions, etc.
>
> 2. If there should be a common set of bylaws, where should it be
> maintained? Should it live in Incubator or somwhere else. If so, where
> do you think?
>
> As part of the Ant PMC establishment process, I have developed a draft
> set of bylaws. The Ant PMC is currently considering these. I think the
> Avalon PMC is also working on this (I think they are probably adopting a
> quite different approach).
As the chair of the newly formed James PMC, we would very much welcome
some standard bylaws to build on. I don't know where these should be
maintained since I'm not aware of who in the ASF maintains existing
bylaws. btw, in the meantime if you'd be willing to share the bylaws
you're considering, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com