Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Your administrative burden is *much* smaller. For example, by simply
registering the project, you get a CVS server, a mailing list system,
forums, a bug tracking system and all that stuff automatically.
I'm not sure that I understood the point. The infrastructure team doe
Now that we have PPMCs, I am in the process of updating our policy document.
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html
In particular, we have decided that not all PMC members have to be on
every PPMC, but just ones that want to help out, that are thus Mentors.
This brings us
Thanks for the useful suggestions..
Sander Striker wrote:
On Wed, 2003-12-24 at 13:42, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
...
The status updates are posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED], prior ACK
from any Incubator PMC member.
Does this need an ACK?
I reckon it would need a "go-ahead" from the community, requiri
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
I note that at the moment we have reserved the right for the
Incubator PMC to vote if so desired.
Does everyone think we should remove that potential out of the policy?
I think so now. It should not be of our business to challenge the
decisions of other PMCs.
If an e
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> If being on the PPMC is not compulsory for PMC members
I believe that we need to distinguish between the PPMC mailing list and the
PPMC. Whether or not a PMC member is subscribed to the PPMC mailing list,
all PMC members are on the PPMC. The key issue is that all iss
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
The current mechanism assumes that designated Mentors are the ones that
have decided to be there, and we may assume that is there are enough
Mentors, they will be there or tell us that they cannot do it anymore.
If we don't have explicit Mentors... how does it work?
MH
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
I note that at the moment we have reserved the right for the Incubator
PMC to vote if so desired.
Does everyone think we should remove that potential out of the policy?
I think so now. It should not be of our business to challenge the
deci
Berin,
Just as the ASF Board does with each PMC, we should try to encourage each
PPMC to do the oversight required of it, with guidance from individuals, but
without micro-management by the PMC as a body.
My comment from "PPMCs, Mentors and Chairs" on the PMC list was that
although each PPMC can
Noel,
No - I agree :>.
My comments about a mentor is nothing to do with Status files or the
like. It's all about having one formal link between the current ASF and
the particular project in incubation.
In fact that person doing all the status reports etc. I would see as
counterproductive, fo
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Noel,
No - I agree :>.
My comments about a mentor is nothing to do with Status files or the
like. It's all about having one formal link between the current ASF
and the particular project in incubation.
In fact that person doing all the status reports etc. I would se
Nicola/Noel et al,
I started playing with the PPMC text, just to wordsmith a tiny bit and
flesh out a few things, and realised I don't understand the entire
intent :>.
I had been seeing the PPMC as the "PMC to be" - so to speak. I think
that is the case for the projects that will become TLPs,
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
> will all developers be on a PPMC? I wouldn't think so - I would
> have thought it would be like a normal TLP, where those who are
> guiding the project (hopefully nearly all committers - but not
> necessarily) will be on the PMC.
All active Committers should be on the P
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
will all developers be on a PPMC? I wouldn't think so - I would
have thought it would be like a normal TLP, where those who are
guiding the project (hopefully nearly all committers - but not
necessarily) will be on the PMC.
All active Committers should be on the PPMC, jus
13 matches
Mail list logo
