My proposition might be stupid, but what if the IPMC had two private lists. One purely IPMC (to discuss things like accepting a new IPMC member) and an other used by IPMC and all PPMC?
It solve your problem of IPMC not being able to participate/follow PPMC private discusion An other benefits is that the PPMC will learn from their own private discussion, but also from the discussion of other PPMC. The only draw back is when an PPMC want its discussion to not be viewed by memeber of other PPMC member. I don't know that it would happen often. I guess not. Gilles 2007/6/20, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Getting back to my original comment, I don't see how the IPMC can meaningfully participate in a discussion or vote held on the PPMC private mailing list. I don't think it's reasonable for an IPMC member who is exercising oversight in the specific case of a new committer to be required to subscribe to the podling's private PPMC mailing list for this purpose. What might work is for the [DISCUSS] and [VOTE] of the candidate to be held simultaneously on the PPMC private mailing list and the IPMC private mailing list. All of both the IPMC and PPMC can fully participate in the process. Then, at the end of the [VOTE] it will be clear whether the vote passed. Craig On Jun 20, 2007, at 8:50 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Upayavira wrote: > >> The implication here is that, if we consider the IPMC to have the >> role >> of overseeing podlings > > Is there an "if" there? ;-) That *is* the job of the Incubator > PMC, and it is the sole holder of that role. > >> IPMC members must have the necessary rights to do so. > > The Incubator PMC is the managing entity of all things in the > Incubator. Nothing is private from the Incubator PMC, by definition. > >> perhaps IPMC members should have access to all podling private lists. > > No perhaps about it. Any Incubator PMC member who wants to be on > any @i.a.o list can be; if they have any difficulty being moderated > on, they should contact me (or anyone else with apmail karma). > >> the right to see archives, but I don't know whether they'd need a >> member proxy to see the archives or if that can be done via unix >> perms on p.a.o). > > At present all private list archives are available only to ASF > Members. This is not policy so much as a pragmatic limitation of > available ACLs. apmail is the owner and apmember is the group. We > have talked about having a protected web interface to private > lists, but thus no one has stepped to do it. And there are issues > to resolve related to granularity of access. > > --- Noel > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
-- Gilles SCOKART --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
