Re: Volunteers: FINAL Cut? Votes on PMC size, vote method, eligibility

[Sh...@lotus.com]

Phew, lots of discussions on this topic!  I've changed my mind about voting
procedure, so I'll use this to throw in my opinions.

+1 vote on Dirk's #2 voting process (this is a change from my earlier vote
for fully open voting)  - Shane

> Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> > 2. public i.e.  I'll ask the ASF secretariat to accept votes on
>         something@apache.org - they tally them and then post the results
>         in such a way that people can verify that the vote was fair.
I do agree with a number of other people who think that fully-open voting
(i.e. on the list, where everyone can see votes as they're cast) is a bad
idea, because it can sway people's votes too much.  So I'm switching my
vote from 1.open to 2.public.
But: Scott's point about open voting notwithstanding, I still think it's
important to keep the end voting records open.  Somehow it just feels
better to do this stuff in the open, which is how our community should work
in general.  And I would urge any of our 'corporate-sponsored' committers
to try to remember that although you might be getting paid for this work in
one way, you should really treat your work on Apache as your personal,
individual commitment.  Heck, that's what the Apache license says at the
top of every Xalan source file!  I've reminded my fellow Lotus/IBM
committers of this many times that the code I check into Xalan and the
opinions I voice on these lists are what I feel are best for Apache and
it's projects, and not neccessarily what's best for my employer.  (Of
course I always reserve the right to prioritize my time: if my employer
says to do something else, then I'd have less time for Xalan work).  And
don't worry about Scott: he won't yell at anyone for voting against him.
But I would be OK with closed voting as well.


+1 vote (as earlier) on committer-only voting -Shane

Same as before, I think it's definitely important, and I think it's getting
clear that this is well supported in the community.


+1 vote on a 5 person PMC for the time being - Shane

Given the ASF deadlines on when we have to have our PMC house in order, I
suggest we stick with a 5 person PMC to start with.  For one, it'll be a
lot quicker to get setup before the ASF gets on our case for being late,
and the idea did have a bunch of momentum on the list for a while.
Also, for those who want individual project representation: try thinking
about what you might want the PMC to be, and see if it really matters.  A
lot of discussion has been about making this PMC being a high-level
guideline setting group, mostly dealing with bigger Apache issues,
legalisims, and new project creation.  In that case, it's not as important
to have all projects specifically represented.  If we do want a body like
this, then right after we get the 5-person PMC formed (and out of trouble
with the ASF) we can form working groups, or Scott's AMC, or something with
project representation, or whatever that will work on the technical and
coordination aspects of xml.apache.org work, and let the PMC work on
legalisims and ASF-wide issues.
I think having separate PMC and <something else> groups will be easier to
work on for it's members as well - we are all volunteers, and having a
single large PMC that deals with all of these issues feels like it might be
too much for it's members to handle in addition.  I'd hate to form a
project-representation PMC and then find out that it's not effective enough
because there are too many types of issues to track.

Of course, there is one side note: it would be best in any size-limited PMC
to ensure that any one project (here I mean Xerces as a single project, not
three: C/J/perl) has at most one member on the PMC.  I'm not sure how to
guaruntee this, but I'm betting that it probably won't happen anyways.
(and if Scott and I both get elected, I wouldn't be surprised if we both
suddenly tried to drop out in favor of the other person... 8-)

-Shane


---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org