You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> on 2004/08/05 22:01:35 UTC
Updating the PMC bylaws
I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current reality:
http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
(red is add, strikethrough is remove)
Before I call a vote on it, I'd like to invite anyone to suggest other
essential information that should be in there, or major cockups I've made
with what is in there.
I plan to call a vote on it on Tuesday 10th.
----
I would like to update the site further in the future to incorporate the
information in the wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/
but that's outside the scope of this first baby step.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Yep, I was wrong with '3 active committers', I've dropped the threeness
part from the proposed changes.
I'll plan to bring it up again at a later date under an oversight topic.
Hen
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Sam Ruby wrote:
> robert burrell donkin wrote:
> >>
> >>>> What about jakarta-oro?
> >
> > this illustrates well the point i was trying to make before.
> >
> > ORO is actually better supervised than several other sub-project i could
> > mention and yet because it doesn't have three active committers who are
> > PMC members, the proposed bylaws say that it must lack sufficient
> > oversight. if the pmc takes it's responsibilities seriously and adheres
> > to the letter of the proposed bylaws, the only possible sanction would
> > be to close the sub-project as soon as the number of active committers
> > on the pmc falls below three (since the bylaws state that it is
> > inadequately supervised).
>
> Oro is a good example. dfs reviews every change. Heck, he makes every
> change. And the other three committers? They are all ASF members.
>
> The one place that "threeness" is crucially important is on releases.
> It isn't so important that there are other PMC members overseeing the
> day to day operations, but it is vitally important that three people
> sign off on every release.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
robert burrell donkin wrote:
>>
>>>> What about jakarta-oro?
>
> this illustrates well the point i was trying to make before.
>
> ORO is actually better supervised than several other sub-project i could
> mention and yet because it doesn't have three active committers who are
> PMC members, the proposed bylaws say that it must lack sufficient
> oversight. if the pmc takes it's responsibilities seriously and adheres
> to the letter of the proposed bylaws, the only possible sanction would
> be to close the sub-project as soon as the number of active committers
> on the pmc falls below three (since the bylaws state that it is
> inadequately supervised).
Oro is a good example. dfs reviews every change. Heck, he makes every
change. And the other three committers? They are all ASF members.
The one place that "threeness" is crucially important is on releases.
It isn't so important that there are other PMC members overseeing the
day to day operations, but it is vitally important that three people
sign off on every release.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On 6 Aug 2004, at 18:23, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>>> What about jakarta-oro?
>> It does have 3 committers on the PMC. Whether they are active or not,
>> I'm
>> unsure, might only be 2. It's planned to merge with Regexp and maybe
>> into
>> Commons over time though, so there's definitely a tendency towards
>> larger
>> oversight.
>
> http://www.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#jakarta-oro
>
> jakarta-oro has four committers defined. Two are not current members
> of the Jakarta PMC:
>
> James Duncan Davidson
> Jon Stevens
>
> One is a member of the Jakarta PMC, but is not active in the he has
> not committed to cvs or posted to the dev mailing list this year (in
> fact, he unsubscribed in March):
>
> Craig R. McClanahan
>
> One is a member of the PMC and is active:
>
> Daniel F. Savarese
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> P.S. In no way should this be construed as a lack of confidence in
> dfs.
this illustrates well the point i was trying to make before.
ORO is actually better supervised than several other sub-project i
could mention and yet because it doesn't have three active committers
who are PMC members, the proposed bylaws say that it must lack
sufficient oversight. if the pmc takes it's responsibilities seriously
and adheres to the letter of the proposed bylaws, the only possible
sanction would be to close the sub-project as soon as the number of
active committers on the pmc falls below three (since the bylaws state
that it is inadequately supervised).
that's why i would prefer something more positive. i'd prefer something
about mandating the pmc to take action to ensure appropriate
supervision when the number of active committers on the pmc falls below
three. this could mean something as simple as asking for volunteers
(from the pmc) to monitor the sub-project, restructuring the control
structure (keeping the code base and infrastructure but eliminating the
formal sub-project with all committers gaining karma on request and all
decisions passing directly to the pmc), hibernating the sub-project or
closing it completely.
if i was on the pmc then i'd be much more worried by some of the
projects with lots of active committers (and so their own sub-culture)
which have very of them on the pmc. it is very, very difficult to
supervise very active projects from outside. there have never been the
problems with small and mature sub-projects that we've seen with large
and active ones. i personally think that a rule that ensures the pmc
takes positive action to ensure appropriate supervision when the ratio
of committers to pmc members falls below 50% (say) would be a good
complement to the rule-of-three.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>>What about jakarta-oro?
>
> It does have 3 committers on the PMC. Whether they are active or not, I'm
> unsure, might only be 2. It's planned to merge with Regexp and maybe into
> Commons over time though, so there's definitely a tendency towards larger
> oversight.
http://www.apache.org/~jim/projects.html#jakarta-oro
jakarta-oro has four committers defined. Two are not current members of
the Jakarta PMC:
James Duncan Davidson
Jon Stevens
One is a member of the Jakarta PMC, but is not active in the he has not
committed to cvs or posted to the dev mailing list this year (in fact,
he unsubscribed in March):
Craig R. McClanahan
One is a member of the PMC and is active:
Daniel F. Savarese
- Sam Ruby
P.S. In no way should this be construed as a lack of confidence in dfs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Rodney Waldhoff <rw...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Something like ECS is more likely to be a problem I think. It's not
> actually an active community (as far as I can tell) so pretty unlikely
> to have strong oversight. It still has 3 committers on the PMC, they
> just might not be very active there (or even listening to the list).
This seems like a problem that takes care of itself. If there's nothing
being committed, there's nothing really to "oversee", is there?
- Rod
> Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>
> > Henri Yandell wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> However, the aim for this modification is to bring it in line with
> >> reality
> >> and not future plans and we've never had a PMC member who was not a
> >> committer. Every (loose) description I've seen of a PMC describes it as
> >> the active committers to a project.
> >
> > Yup.
> >
> >> So I'd like to stay with committers if possible.
> >
> > "The PMC will contain at least 3 committers from each subproject" [1]
> >
> > Even better: make it "*active* committers". If person went inactive on
> > the project, ideally he should be replaced with someone who is more
> > active, in order to better represent project, and current status of the
> > project.
>
> What about jakarta-oro?
It does have 3 committers on the PMC. Whether they are active or not, I'm
unsure, might only be 2. It's planned to merge with Regexp and maybe into
Commons over time though, so there's definitely a tendency towards larger
oversight.
Something like ECS is more likely to be a problem I think. It's not
actually an active community (as far as I can tell) so pretty unlikely to
have strong oversight. It still has 3 committers on the PMC, they just
might not be very active there (or even listening to the list).
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> However, the aim for this modification is to bring it in line with
>> reality
>> and not future plans and we've never had a PMC member who was not a
>> committer. Every (loose) description I've seen of a PMC describes it as
>> the active committers to a project.
>
> Yup.
>
>> So I'd like to stay with committers if possible.
>
> "The PMC will contain at least 3 committers from each subproject" [1]
>
> Even better: make it "*active* committers". If person went inactive on
> the project, ideally he should be replaced with someone who is more
> active, in order to better represent project, and current status of the
> project.
What about jakarta-oro?
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Henri Yandell wrote:
...
> However, the aim for this modification is to bring it in line with reality
> and not future plans and we've never had a PMC member who was not a
> committer. Every (loose) description I've seen of a PMC describes it as
> the active committers to a project.
Yup.
> So I'd like to stay with committers if possible.
"The PMC will contain at least 3 committers from each subproject" [1]
Even better: make it "*active* committers". If person went inactive on
the project, ideally he should be replaced with someone who is more
active, in order to better represent project, and current status of the
project.
Vadim
[1] http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> Interestingly, the ASF bylaws seem to imply that PMCs are only
> for members and officers of the ASF. I may be mis-interpreting:
> "Project Management Committees consisting of at least one officer of the
> corporation, who shall be designated chairman of such committee, and may
> include one or more other members of the corporation."
I don't see anything that excludes non-members. I guess it is all in how
you interpret the last clause. I interpret it as weak, as opposed to the
strong statement made about the PMC Chair's authority.
> Every (loose) description I've seen of a PMC describes it as the
> active committers to a project.
It can be whatever you need, but it should be (IMO) *at least* the active
committers.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Interestingly, the ASF bylaws seem to imply that PMCs are only for members
and officers of the ASF. I may be mis-interpreting:
"Project Management Committees consisting of at least one officer of the
corporation, who shall be designated chairman of such committee, and may
include one or more other members of the corporation."
However, the aim for this modification is to bring it in line with reality
and not future plans and we've never had a PMC member who was not a
committer. Every (loose) description I've seen of a PMC describes it as
the active committers to a project.
So I'd like to stay with committers if possible.
Hen
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Rodney Waldhoff wrote:
> Also, do we need to limit PMC membership to committers as a matter of
> policy? I suggest simply "Individuals are nominated for the PMC..." or
> something like that.
>
> - Rod
>
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Rodney Waldhoff wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure I follow this statement:
> >
> > "Non-binary voting currently relies on consensus; such as voting in a new
> > chairman."
> >
> > Can one veto a new chairman? Because "-1 == veto" seems to be the
> > conventional meaning of "consensus" around here.
> >
> > Also, we may want to reference or crib bits of
> > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html, especially with respect to
> > what you've labeled "binary voting"
> >
> > - Rod
> >
> > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current reality:
> >>
> >> http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
> >>
> >> (red is add, strikethrough is remove)
> >>
> >> Before I call a vote on it, I'd like to invite anyone to suggest other
> >> essential information that should be in there, or major cockups I've made
> >> with what is in there.
> >>
> >> I plan to call a vote on it on Tuesday 10th.
> >>
> >> ----
> >>
> >> I would like to update the site further in the future to incorporate the
> >> information in the wiki:
> >>
> >> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/
> >>
> >> but that's outside the scope of this first baby step.
> >>
> >> Hen
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Rodney Waldhoff <rw...@apache.org>.
Also, do we need to limit PMC membership to committers as a matter of
policy? I suggest simply "Individuals are nominated for the PMC..." or
something like that.
- Rod
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Rodney Waldhoff wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow this statement:
>
> "Non-binary voting currently relies on consensus; such as voting in a new
> chairman."
>
> Can one veto a new chairman? Because "-1 == veto" seems to be the
> conventional meaning of "consensus" around here.
>
> Also, we may want to reference or crib bits of
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html, especially with respect to
> what you've labeled "binary voting"
>
> - Rod
>
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current reality:
>>
>> http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
>>
>> (red is add, strikethrough is remove)
>>
>> Before I call a vote on it, I'd like to invite anyone to suggest other
>> essential information that should be in there, or major cockups I've made
>> with what is in there.
>>
>> I plan to call a vote on it on Tuesday 10th.
>>
>> ----
>>
>> I would like to update the site further in the future to incorporate the
>> information in the wiki:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/
>>
>> but that's outside the scope of this first baby step.
>>
>> Hen
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Okay, think I've responded to your points. Let me know if I've failed.
Going to lay on the emphasis again that this is aimed to represent the
current situation, rather than design a new one. Thus we have two types of
majority approval in existence, 51% success and 75% success. Mentioning as
I'm sure the cracks in the beauty of the current setup is as obvious to
all as it is to me.
Once we've described the current situation, we can then move to simplify
it.
Hen
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> Ah, good point. I chose a bad word :)
>
> Will change 'consensus' to 'community agreement'. Namely, there is no hard
> and fast rule, we just work to an agreement.
>
> I should also change "voting in a new chairman" to "voting on the
> recommendation of a chair to the board".
>
> I'll also look at decisions.html and bring my text closer to its language.
>
> Hen
>
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Rodney Waldhoff wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure I follow this statement:
> >
> > "Non-binary voting currently relies on consensus; such as voting in a new
> > chairman."
> >
> > Can one veto a new chairman? Because "-1 == veto" seems to be the
> > conventional meaning of "consensus" around here.
> >
> > Also, we may want to reference or crib bits of
> > http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html, especially with respect to
> > what you've labeled "binary voting"
> >
> > - Rod
> >
> > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current reality:
> > >
> > > http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
> > >
> > > (red is add, strikethrough is remove)
> > >
> > > Before I call a vote on it, I'd like to invite anyone to suggest other
> > > essential information that should be in there, or major cockups I've made
> > > with what is in there.
> > >
> > > I plan to call a vote on it on Tuesday 10th.
> > >
> > > ----
> > >
> > > I would like to update the site further in the future to incorporate the
> > > information in the wiki:
> > >
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/
> > >
> > > but that's outside the scope of this first baby step.
> > >
> > > Hen
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Ah, good point. I chose a bad word :)
Will change 'consensus' to 'community agreement'. Namely, there is no hard
and fast rule, we just work to an agreement.
I should also change "voting in a new chairman" to "voting on the
recommendation of a chair to the board".
I'll also look at decisions.html and bring my text closer to its language.
Hen
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Rodney Waldhoff wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow this statement:
>
> "Non-binary voting currently relies on consensus; such as voting in a new
> chairman."
>
> Can one veto a new chairman? Because "-1 == veto" seems to be the
> conventional meaning of "consensus" around here.
>
> Also, we may want to reference or crib bits of
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html, especially with respect to
> what you've labeled "binary voting"
>
> - Rod
>
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> >
> > I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current reality:
> >
> > http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
> >
> > (red is add, strikethrough is remove)
> >
> > Before I call a vote on it, I'd like to invite anyone to suggest other
> > essential information that should be in there, or major cockups I've made
> > with what is in there.
> >
> > I plan to call a vote on it on Tuesday 10th.
> >
> > ----
> >
> > I would like to update the site further in the future to incorporate the
> > information in the wiki:
> >
> > http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/
> >
> > but that's outside the scope of this first baby step.
> >
> > Hen
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Rodney Waldhoff <rw...@apache.org>.
I'm not sure I follow this statement:
"Non-binary voting currently relies on consensus; such as voting in a new
chairman."
Can one veto a new chairman? Because "-1 == veto" seems to be the
conventional meaning of "consensus" around here.
Also, we may want to reference or crib bits of
http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html, especially with respect to
what you've labeled "binary voting"
- Rod
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current reality:
>
> http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
>
> (red is add, strikethrough is remove)
>
> Before I call a vote on it, I'd like to invite anyone to suggest other
> essential information that should be in there, or major cockups I've made
> with what is in there.
>
> I plan to call a vote on it on Tuesday 10th.
>
> ----
>
> I would like to update the site further in the future to incorporate the
> information in the wiki:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/
>
> but that's outside the scope of this first baby step.
>
> Hen
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>
> > 3. it'd probably be a good idea to refer to another document containing
> > voting guidelines which could be changed more frequently without board
> > approval.
>
> I can't see anything suggesting we need to get the board's approval;
> skimming the ASF bylaws it looks more like we change things and the board
> have the right to kick us out if we screw up. I'll find out for sure.
Just following up on this for those who didn't see the Cc to the PMC list.
Greg responded that we don't need to get approval from the board, just to
let them know of major changes in the quarterly report.
-
We also have enough board members on this list I suspect, that it's not
going to surprise them in the quarterly.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> looks good :)
>
> a few minor points:
>
> 1. it'd be tidy to specify the voting process required to change the
> bylaws
Done.
> 2. it would probably be a good idea to specify some basic, default
> rules about decision taking on the pmc (votes, quorums, casting vote?)
> in the bylaws.
Included with the previous section.
Just to underline something; I'm in no way pushing anything new on the PMC
with the voting section, this is exactly how (I think) it works currently.
I plan to use exactly this voting style for the vote I'll call on Tuesday
(community willing).
> 3. it'd probably be a good idea to refer to another document containing
> voting guidelines which could be changed more frequently without board
> approval.
I can't see anything suggesting we need to get the board's approval;
skimming the ASF bylaws it looks more like we change things and the board
have the right to kick us out if we screw up. I'll find out for sure.
> 4. maybe there's a better way to phrase the intention of 'Any
> subproject that does not contain 3 members of the PMC, lacks sufficient
> oversight.'. probably a bit too strong - phrased in this way it could
> become a stick for our own backs. maybe what's important is that when
> the number of active pmc members who are committers in a subproject
> falls below three then the supervision from the pmc needs to change
> from passive to active.
Dunno, I like the strong part; makes it very simple. If a subproject lacks
3 PMC members, it lacks the numbers needed to vote on issues pertaining to
the subproject at the project level.
I'm happy to add an extra part to this:
"lacks sufficient oversight and the PMC will need to take steps to resolve
this. "
How does that feel?
Hen
> On 5 Aug 2004, at 21:01, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> >
> > I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current
> > reality:
> >
> > http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
> >
> > (red is add, strikethrough is remove)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Updating the PMC bylaws
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
looks good :)
a few minor points:
1. it'd be tidy to specify the voting process required to change the
bylaws
2. it would probably be a good idea to specify some basic, default
rules about decision taking on the pmc (votes, quorums, casting vote?)
in the bylaws.
3. it'd probably be a good idea to refer to another document containing
voting guidelines which could be changed more frequently without board
approval.
4. maybe there's a better way to phrase the intention of 'Any
subproject that does not contain 3 members of the PMC, lacks sufficient
oversight.'. probably a bit too strong - phrased in this way it could
become a stick for our own backs. maybe what's important is that when
the number of active pmc members who are committers in a subproject
falls below three then the supervision from the pmc needs to change
from passive to active.
- robert
On 5 Aug 2004, at 21:01, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
> I'd like to go ahead and update the PMC bylaws to reflect current
> reality:
>
> http://www.osjava.org/~hen/jakarta/management.html
>
> (red is add, strikethrough is remove)
>
> Before I call a vote on it, I'd like to invite anyone to suggest other
> essential information that should be in there, or major cockups I've
> made
> with what is in there.
>
> I plan to call a vote on it on Tuesday 10th.
>
> ----
>
> I would like to update the site further in the future to incorporate
> the
> information in the wiki:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/
>
> but that's outside the scope of this first baby step.
>
> Hen
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org