On Sep 7, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Andrew Rist <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not particularly satisfied with current PMC selection process. I think > the first pass was actually fairly reasonable, and fairly quickly resulted in > a list that contains the people who are serious about the project. > Unfortunately, we haven't been able to find consensus on the next step. I'd > like to propose a different way to look at this which may lead us to a better > way to move forward. I think we can avoid the need to organize the next > step around '-1' (i.e. speaking out against potential PMC members - > discussions around who to leave off), and instead create an affirmative > process where we identify who we want on. > > What is a good Project Management Committee? > Here's my start (please expand on this): > > * Representative of the diversity of tasks in the community > (developers, web/wiki/forum, translators, testers, UX, release, > marketing, press, ecosystem, infrastructure) > * Representative of the geographical diversity in the community > * Made up of the most involved members of the community > * Able and Competent to perform required ASF functions (overseeing > releases and developing the community) > * Represents the community in the best possible light > > While on one hand I understand why so many of us want to be on the PMC, a > large PMC is not necessarily in the best interest of the project. The PMC > should not be making decisions about the direction of the project and on who > gets to do what - the PMC should be mostly involved with voting in new > committers and approving releases. The direction of the project should be > determined on ooo-dev, and by the people who are active in the parts of the > community listed above. > > > My Proposal for the next step in the PMC selection process: > I suggest that each of us provide up to 10 names for the PMC. no spreadsheet > - no voting - no '-1s' for now. Just an affirmative list of the 10 people > you think should be doing the work of the PMC. (the list of names we have > produced so far is a great place to start for your list, but it is not > exclusive) Anyone can play! PPMC members, committers, the community. Next > we use this to produce a list of the group getting the most votes. (using > PPMC and committer lists as more binding) We can use this to produce the > next pass at the proposed PMC roster, hopefully a PMC of around 20 members. > Interesting idea. Another way of keeping it small and focused would be to rotate all committers in over time, say 20 at a time for 6 months at a time. Everyone gets a turn, no one left out and power does not concentrate. > Andrew > > > > > > > >
