Re: INCUBATOR-57 aka IPMC votes to ratify PPMC committers

[Craig L Russell]

+1

I struggled a lot with the current guide to do two things:







Craig

On Jun 3, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:

1. Give the PPMC experience in doing things that as a PMC they will have to do, while at the same time, 2. Give the incubator PMC oversight and the ability to step in if the PPMC acts incorrectly. So, assuming both committer and PPMC membership votes are covered by the new guide, I'm very satisfied.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


"Voting in a new PPMC member"? (on the same page)?

thanks,
dims

Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
| Currently on http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html, we have:
| ---
| Vote on the podling's private (PPMC) list, with notice posted to the

| vote email with a cover statement that this vote is underway on the
| podling's private list. Many consider this approach to be best
| practice. After completing the vote on the PPMC list, the proposer
| calls a vote on the Incubator PMC private list, summarizing the
| discussion and vote, with a reference to the archived discussion and

| three +1 votes from Incubator PMC members during the PPMC vote, in
| order to give all Incubator PMC members a chance to express their
| support or disapproval after seeing the PPMC discussion and vote
| results. Note that only the Incubator PMC members can see the

| all Incubator PMC feedback with the PPMC. Moreover, only Apache
| members may review the private PPMC list (this is normally not an
| issue since most Incubator PMC members are Apache members).
| ---
|
| I'd like to make the suggestion that we alter this to:
| ---
| Vote on the podling's private (PPMC) list, with notice posted to the

| vote email with a cover statement that this vote is underway on the
| podling's private list. Many consider this approach to be best
| practice. After completing the vote on the PPMC list, the proposer
| *sends a note to* the Incubator PMC private list, summarizing the
| discussion and vote, with a reference to the archived discussion and
| vote threads by the PPMC.  *Any member of the Incubator PMC can ACK
| the receipt of the vote.  This starts a 72-hour window for lazy

| for a full vote by the Incubator PMC, the committer request is
| approved by the Incubator PMC and the PPMC can start the committer
| invitation process.*
| ---
|
| This intentionally follows the procedure for adding a PMC member wrt
| full ASF board.  I like the concept of expanding this for committers
| as well for Incubation, so there.  I don't like needless 'dual
| voting', but I do want the IPMC to have the chance to execute
| oversight.
|
| WDYT?    -- justin
|

| To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)

iD8DBQFIRauEgNg6eWEDv1kRAhR+AJ4y9Lj4QFHbLWzJ+WS6xs2pTH20CwCdGlqw
/kXX8IPkGwl+8WIuKzg+AGU=
=ItmI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Quick question, haven't thought thru, but raising it here...Does it make sense to align voting in a new committer with | Incubator private list. The notice is a separate email forwarding the | vote threads by the PPMC. The Incubator vote is done even if there are | Incubator private discussion, and the podling's Mentors should review | Incubator private list. The notice is a separate email forwarding the | consensus. After 72 hours and no requests by any Incubator PMC member | ---------------------------------------------------------------------

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!

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature