You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@struts.apache.org by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org> on 2004/12/05 19:08:27 UTC
What binds us (Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality)
As always, everyone is invited to vote on everything. :)
The website is still a little out of synch with what has been decided on the dev list. Right now, the best reference for the release process is the Release Checklist.
* http://struts.apache.org/release-checklist.html
This document obsoletes the link to Jakarta Tomcat's guidelines, which cover more than the release process. We just have gotten around to removing the link yet.
The Struts resolution includes an instruction to draft a set of bylaws, which we have done here:
* http://struts.apache.org/bylaws.html
As to who has binding votes and why:
The copyright to Struts codebase is owned by the Apache Software Foundation and distributed under the Apache license. But, if the foundation's eyes, Struts "belongs" to the community. Through a corporate resolution,
*http://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2004/board_minutes_2004_03_17.txt
the foundation has delegated the task of creating and maintaining Struts to the Struts PMC. The PMC makes the day-to-day decisions, which includes determining whether a distribution is "ready for primetime" or not.
Because the PMC is the body created by ASF corporate resolution, only the votes of the PMC members are "binding", in a technical, legal sense. But, if we have three PMC members voting "yes" and a dozen other people voting "no", I'm sure the PMC would reconsider. The foundation's goal is to create codebases that survive its creators and any given set of maintainers. The health of the community always comes first.
The important thing to remember is that the Struts PMC is not a government, it's a team. Like most teams, we set up procedures so that we don't have to reinvent the wheel over and over again. But we do not serve the procedures, the procedures serve us. There are legal reasons why the PMC has to authorize a release on behalf of the foundation, but I believe most of us would give as much weight to votes of Committers, and Developers, and Users, as we do PMC members.
For a while at Jakarta, the Committer's votes were considered "binding" too. But, from the ASF board's perspective, they were never binding in a technical, legal sense. I've strongly suggested that the Jakarta documentation be updated, but others felt it better to leave it alone. However, there is a now policy at Jakarta to make all the committers PMC members as soon as possible, to cure any procedural issues.
Some of our procedures do have to be legally binding to ensure that there is no question of owns the Struts codebase and where it came from. All the ASF committers have agreements on file that assign the rights to our commits to the Foundation, there is a resolution by the Foundation that created Struts, there are regular PMC reports to the board about the status of Struts, and the PMC is responsible for vetting each and every change we make to Struts, either ourselves or through a committer.
Legally, the Struts PMC that makes all the decisions on behalf of the Foundation, because the PMC is the legal body that the Foundation created. We make those decisions based on feedback from everyone in the community (including our own experiences, since we are also members of the community we serve). Inviting everyone to vote is one way that we collect feedback.
-Ted.
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:57:02 -0600, Eddie Bush wrote:
> I don't see a difference, Martin.
>
> It's moot to me. I haven't had time to test it, so I hadn't
> intended to voice any input. I don't see what you're quoting to
> say that only PMC members have voting rights on the quality of a
> release though. In fact, I still feel my original view is valid:
> PMC members are there to authorize the release, once committers
> determine it's quality by a vote.
>
> I'm not trying to be thick :-) I just don't see what you're
> "pointing" to as an authority on the matter. It's more for the
> sake of my understanding, I suppose. I might care in the future ;-)
>
> Y'all have fun. I've got to make a road trip this weekend :-( No
> rest for the wicked!
>
> Night,
>
> Eddie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
> To: "Eddie Bush" <ea...@swbell.net>
> Cc: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 9:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality
>
>
>> You're quoting from the Jakarta decision making page. We're not
>> at Jakarta any more, and have our own process now. You have some
>> catching up to do, Eddie. ;-)
>>
>> Here's what we're doing these days:
>>
>> http://struts.apache.org/releases.html
>>
>> --
>> Martin Cooper
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:55:47 -0600, Eddie Bush <ea...@swbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I was of the impression that committers and up judged quality
>>> and PMC members were in charge of deciding whether distribution
>>> would happen or not.
>>>
>>> <quot>
>>> After a new release is built, it must be tested before being
>>> released to the
>>> public. Majority approval is required before the release can be
>>> made. Once a
>>> release is approved by the Committers, the Project Management
>>> Committee can
>>> authorize its distribution on behalf of the Foundation. </quot>
>>>
>>> Am I misinterpreting that?
>>>
>>> Eddie
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 12:49 AM
>>> Subject: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality
>>>
>>>> The Struts 1.2.6 test build has been available for about two
>>>> weeks now. Once you have had a chance to form an opinion on
>>>> the quality of this build, please respond to the following
>>>> vote.
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> Based on its quality, the Struts 1.2.6 build should be
>>>> classified as:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] Alpha
>>>> [ ] Beta
>>>> [ ] General Availability (GA)
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> If you are voting for Alpha or Beta, please state your
>>>> concerns with the build as it is today.
>>>>
>>>> Only the votes of Struts PMC members are binding. However,
>>>> all opinions and feedback are welcome.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Martin Cooper
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> ------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>>>> unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-
>>>> mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---
>>> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
>>> Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
>>> Tested on: 12/3/2004 8:55:48 PM
>>> avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
>>> http://www.avast.com
>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
> Tested on: 12/3/2004 9:57:04 PM
> avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: What binds us (Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality)
Posted by Niall Pemberton <ni...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
I buy into what Ted said on legality/reality. The reality is that if
anyone -1's anything then they have to justify why, whether they're a PMC
member or not - if someone puts forward good reasons for a -1 then they're
not going to be ignored. On the other side of the coin the more people that
+1 a release (or decision) the better, whether they're PMC,committer,
contributor or user. I belive its going to be a rare occasion when when the
PMC ploughs ahead with somthing when people ae -1'ing.
Niall
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eddie Bush" <ea...@swbell.net>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: What binds us (Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality)
> Good stuff :-) Thanks Ted and Niall for the clarification. My apologies,
> again, if I came off as being obtuse. I just wasn't seeing it. Niall's
> message helped, and I really apprecite your note fleshing things out, Ted.
>
> Eddie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ted Husted" <hu...@apache.org>
> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 12:08 PM
> Subject: What binds us (Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality)
>
>
> As always, everyone is invited to vote on everything. :)
>
> The website is still a little out of synch with what has been decided on
the
> dev list. Right now, the best reference for the release process is the
> Release Checklist.
>
> * http://struts.apache.org/release-checklist.html
>
> This document obsoletes the link to Jakarta Tomcat's guidelines, which
cover
> more than the release process. We just have gotten around to removing the
> link yet.
>
> The Struts resolution includes an instruction to draft a set of bylaws,
> which we have done here:
>
> * http://struts.apache.org/bylaws.html
>
> As to who has binding votes and why:
>
> The copyright to Struts codebase is owned by the Apache Software
Foundation
> and distributed under the Apache license. But, if the foundation's eyes,
> Struts "belongs" to the community. Through a corporate resolution,
>
>
*http://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2004/board_minutes_2004_03
_17.txt
>
> the foundation has delegated the task of creating and maintaining Struts
to
> the Struts PMC. The PMC makes the day-to-day decisions, which includes
> determining whether a distribution is "ready for primetime" or not.
>
> Because the PMC is the body created by ASF corporate resolution, only the
> votes of the PMC members are "binding", in a technical, legal sense. But,
if
> we have three PMC members voting "yes" and a dozen other people voting
"no",
> I'm sure the PMC would reconsider. The foundation's goal is to create
> codebases that survive its creators and any given set of maintainers. The
> health of the community always comes first.
>
> The important thing to remember is that the Struts PMC is not a
government,
> it's a team. Like most teams, we set up procedures so that we don't have
to
> reinvent the wheel over and over again. But we do not serve the
procedures,
> the procedures serve us. There are legal reasons why the PMC has to
> authorize a release on behalf of the foundation, but I believe most of us
> would give as much weight to votes of Committers, and Developers, and
Users,
> as we do PMC members.
>
> For a while at Jakarta, the Committer's votes were considered "binding"
too.
> But, from the ASF board's perspective, they were never binding in a
> technical, legal sense. I've strongly suggested that the Jakarta
> documentation be updated, but others felt it better to leave it alone.
> However, there is a now policy at Jakarta to make all the committers PMC
> members as soon as possible, to cure any procedural issues.
>
> Some of our procedures do have to be legally binding to ensure that there
is
> no question of owns the Struts codebase and where it came from. All the
ASF
> committers have agreements on file that assign the rights to our commits
to
> the Foundation, there is a resolution by the Foundation that created
Struts,
> there are regular PMC reports to the board about the status of Struts, and
> the PMC is responsible for vetting each and every change we make to
Struts,
> either ourselves or through a committer.
>
> Legally, the Struts PMC that makes all the decisions on behalf of the
> Foundation, because the PMC is the legal body that the Foundation created.
> We make those decisions based on feedback from everyone in the community
> (including our own experiences, since we are also members of the community
> we serve). Inviting everyone to vote is one way that we collect feedback.
>
> -Ted.
>
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:57:02 -0600, Eddie Bush wrote:
> > I don't see a difference, Martin.
> >
> > It's moot to me. I haven't had time to test it, so I hadn't
> > intended to voice any input. I don't see what you're quoting to
> > say that only PMC members have voting rights on the quality of a
> > release though. In fact, I still feel my original view is valid:
> > PMC members are there to authorize the release, once committers
> > determine it's quality by a vote.
> >
> > I'm not trying to be thick :-) I just don't see what you're
> > "pointing" to as an authority on the matter. It's more for the
> > sake of my understanding, I suppose. I might care in the future ;-)
> >
> > Y'all have fun. I've got to make a road trip this weekend :-( No
> > rest for the wicked!
> >
> > Night,
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
> > To: "Eddie Bush" <ea...@swbell.net>
> > Cc: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 9:31 PM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality
> >
> >
> >> You're quoting from the Jakarta decision making page. We're not
> >> at Jakarta any more, and have our own process now. You have some
> >> catching up to do, Eddie. ;-)
> >>
> >> Here's what we're doing these days:
> >>
> >> http://struts.apache.org/releases.html
> >>
> >> --
> >> Martin Cooper
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:55:47 -0600, Eddie Bush <ea...@swbell.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I was of the impression that committers and up judged quality
> >>> and PMC members were in charge of deciding whether distribution
> >>> would happen or not.
> >>>
> >>> <quot>
> >>> After a new release is built, it must be tested before being
> >>> released to the
> >>> public. Majority approval is required before the release can be
> >>> made. Once a
> >>> release is approved by the Committers, the Project Management
> >>> Committee can
> >>> authorize its distribution on behalf of the Foundation. </quot>
> >>>
> >>> Am I misinterpreting that?
> >>>
> >>> Eddie
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
> >>> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> >>> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 12:49 AM
> >>> Subject: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality
> >>>
> >>>> The Struts 1.2.6 test build has been available for about two
> >>>> weeks now. Once you have had a chance to form an opinion on
> >>>> the quality of this build, please respond to the following
> >>>> vote.
> >>>>
> >>>> -----
> >>>> Based on its quality, the Struts 1.2.6 build should be
> >>>> classified as:
> >>>>
> >>>> [ ] Alpha
> >>>> [ ] Beta
> >>>> [ ] General Availability (GA)
> >>>> -----
> >>>>
> >>>> If you are voting for Alpha or Beta, please state your
> >>>> concerns with the build as it is today.
> >>>>
> >>>> Only the votes of Struts PMC members are binding. However,
> >>>> all opinions and feedback are welcome.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Martin Cooper
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> ------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
> >>>> unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-
> >>>> mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> ---
> >>> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> >>> Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
> >>> Tested on: 12/3/2004 8:55:48 PM
> >>> avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
> >>> http://www.avast.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> --- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For
> >> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---
> > avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> > Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
> > Tested on: 12/3/2004 9:57:04 PM
> > avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
> > http://www.avast.com
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For
> > additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
> Tested on: 12/5/2004 1:06:25 PM
> avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
Re: What binds us (Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality)
Posted by Eddie Bush <ea...@swbell.net>.
Good stuff :-) Thanks Ted and Niall for the clarification. My apologies,
again, if I came off as being obtuse. I just wasn't seeing it. Niall's
message helped, and I really apprecite your note fleshing things out, Ted.
Eddie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Husted" <hu...@apache.org>
To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 12:08 PM
Subject: What binds us (Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality)
As always, everyone is invited to vote on everything. :)
The website is still a little out of synch with what has been decided on the
dev list. Right now, the best reference for the release process is the
Release Checklist.
* http://struts.apache.org/release-checklist.html
This document obsoletes the link to Jakarta Tomcat's guidelines, which cover
more than the release process. We just have gotten around to removing the
link yet.
The Struts resolution includes an instruction to draft a set of bylaws,
which we have done here:
* http://struts.apache.org/bylaws.html
As to who has binding votes and why:
The copyright to Struts codebase is owned by the Apache Software Foundation
and distributed under the Apache license. But, if the foundation's eyes,
Struts "belongs" to the community. Through a corporate resolution,
*http://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2004/board_minutes_2004_03_17.txt
the foundation has delegated the task of creating and maintaining Struts to
the Struts PMC. The PMC makes the day-to-day decisions, which includes
determining whether a distribution is "ready for primetime" or not.
Because the PMC is the body created by ASF corporate resolution, only the
votes of the PMC members are "binding", in a technical, legal sense. But, if
we have three PMC members voting "yes" and a dozen other people voting "no",
I'm sure the PMC would reconsider. The foundation's goal is to create
codebases that survive its creators and any given set of maintainers. The
health of the community always comes first.
The important thing to remember is that the Struts PMC is not a government,
it's a team. Like most teams, we set up procedures so that we don't have to
reinvent the wheel over and over again. But we do not serve the procedures,
the procedures serve us. There are legal reasons why the PMC has to
authorize a release on behalf of the foundation, but I believe most of us
would give as much weight to votes of Committers, and Developers, and Users,
as we do PMC members.
For a while at Jakarta, the Committer's votes were considered "binding" too.
But, from the ASF board's perspective, they were never binding in a
technical, legal sense. I've strongly suggested that the Jakarta
documentation be updated, but others felt it better to leave it alone.
However, there is a now policy at Jakarta to make all the committers PMC
members as soon as possible, to cure any procedural issues.
Some of our procedures do have to be legally binding to ensure that there is
no question of owns the Struts codebase and where it came from. All the ASF
committers have agreements on file that assign the rights to our commits to
the Foundation, there is a resolution by the Foundation that created Struts,
there are regular PMC reports to the board about the status of Struts, and
the PMC is responsible for vetting each and every change we make to Struts,
either ourselves or through a committer.
Legally, the Struts PMC that makes all the decisions on behalf of the
Foundation, because the PMC is the legal body that the Foundation created.
We make those decisions based on feedback from everyone in the community
(including our own experiences, since we are also members of the community
we serve). Inviting everyone to vote is one way that we collect feedback.
-Ted.
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 21:57:02 -0600, Eddie Bush wrote:
> I don't see a difference, Martin.
>
> It's moot to me. I haven't had time to test it, so I hadn't
> intended to voice any input. I don't see what you're quoting to
> say that only PMC members have voting rights on the quality of a
> release though. In fact, I still feel my original view is valid:
> PMC members are there to authorize the release, once committers
> determine it's quality by a vote.
>
> I'm not trying to be thick :-) I just don't see what you're
> "pointing" to as an authority on the matter. It's more for the
> sake of my understanding, I suppose. I might care in the future ;-)
>
> Y'all have fun. I've got to make a road trip this weekend :-( No
> rest for the wicked!
>
> Night,
>
> Eddie
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
> To: "Eddie Bush" <ea...@swbell.net>
> Cc: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 9:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality
>
>
>> You're quoting from the Jakarta decision making page. We're not
>> at Jakarta any more, and have our own process now. You have some
>> catching up to do, Eddie. ;-)
>>
>> Here's what we're doing these days:
>>
>> http://struts.apache.org/releases.html
>>
>> --
>> Martin Cooper
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 20:55:47 -0600, Eddie Bush <ea...@swbell.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I was of the impression that committers and up judged quality
>>> and PMC members were in charge of deciding whether distribution
>>> would happen or not.
>>>
>>> <quot>
>>> After a new release is built, it must be tested before being
>>> released to the
>>> public. Majority approval is required before the release can be
>>> made. Once a
>>> release is approved by the Committers, the Project Management
>>> Committee can
>>> authorize its distribution on behalf of the Foundation. </quot>
>>>
>>> Am I misinterpreting that?
>>>
>>> Eddie
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Martin Cooper" <mf...@gmail.com>
>>> To: "Struts Developers List" <de...@struts.apache.org>
>>> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 12:49 AM
>>> Subject: [VOTE] Struts 1.2.6 Quality
>>>
>>>> The Struts 1.2.6 test build has been available for about two
>>>> weeks now. Once you have had a chance to form an opinion on
>>>> the quality of this build, please respond to the following
>>>> vote.
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> Based on its quality, the Struts 1.2.6 build should be
>>>> classified as:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] Alpha
>>>> [ ] Beta
>>>> [ ] General Availability (GA)
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> If you are voting for Alpha or Beta, please state your
>>>> concerns with the build as it is today.
>>>>
>>>> Only the votes of Struts PMC members are binding. However,
>>>> all opinions and feedback are welcome.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Martin Cooper
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> ------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
>>>> unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For additional commands, e-
>>>> mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---
>>> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
>>> Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
>>> Tested on: 12/3/2004 8:55:48 PM
>>> avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
>>> http://www.avast.com
>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For
>> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>
>
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
> Tested on: 12/3/2004 9:57:04 PM
> avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org For
> additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0449-1, 12/02/2004
Tested on: 12/5/2004 1:06:25 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org