On 25.01.2015 19:51, Andrew Purtell wrote: >> That hardly ever happens (it's most likely when there are problems with > > > a podling's first few releases), which is why you get the impression > > > that the PPMC can make binding decisions. > > Close. The PPMC membership feels they have made a decision that matters > with equal input. > Certainly on PPMCs I've been on, > there is awareness that everything is > provisional > . Still, a > process takes place on PPMC mailing lists leading to a tallied outcome. > The input that leads to this output is the consensus or voting of *a group > of equal peers*. > This output is handed to the IPMC in aggregate. > When casting votes on the PPMC lists there are no +1 (binding) or +1 > (non-binding) distinctions made. PPMC sends the outcome over to the IPMC > feeling some level of ownership having just participated in a decision > making process as equal > s > . (Or at least so I think, in some perhaps quaint notion.) Of course in > IPMC voting it is different, but the IPMC is where supervision happens, or > doesn't, as some argue.
This is *exactly* the way things work in a TLP. Any committer can propose a release. The PMC must (!) start a (public) vote. Anyone can vote, with PMC votes being binding. /Any/ -1 vote, either from PMC member or plain committer, should block the release and trigger a discussion to find a solution; and in this discussion (which purpose is to reach consensus on a solution), PMC members have no more voice than any other community member. If the PMC decides to ignore a -1 on a release vote, they'd better have really good reasons for that, or I'd expect the Board to come down like a ton of bricks on that PMC. The situation is slightly different with new committer/PMC member nominations and votes, which are private; you have a point there. -- Brane > On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 25.01.2015 19:16, Andrew Purtell wrote: >>> With a PPMC we invite newcomers to make votes we call binding on matters >> of >>> their own project. >> As other people have said, PPMC members (that are not also IPMC members) >> do not have binding votes, neither for releases nor for inviting new >> committers/PPMC members. The "binding" bit lies with the IPMC, which can >> revoke any formal decision made by the PPMC. >> >> That hardly ever happens (it's most likely when there are problems with >> a podling's first few releases), which is why you get the impression >> that the PPMC can make binding decisions. In this respect, there's no >> practical difference between the current IPMC model and the proposed >> pTLP model. >> >> Of course, when it comes to /technical/ decisions, there's no such thing >> as a vote, so the term "binding" does not apply. Consensus, of one form >> or another, always rules: and the IPMC or mentors can't meddle in this >> case. >> >> -- Brane >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
