xml.apache.org refactoring #1 - expansion of PMC

[Ted Leung]

As you are no doubt aware, the ASF board has approved two new PMC's: one for Web Services (to include Axis, SOAP, XML-RPC, and XML-Security), and one for Cocoon.   In keeping with the proposal that I made last week, I'd like each of the remaining subprojects to elect 1 or 2 persons as they see fit to represent them on the XML PMC.  I would like to see these elections completed by Friday, Jan 31.   If you need vote counting support please send a note to [EMAIL PROTECTED].  The remaining active projects are:   Axkit Batik Crimson Fop Forrest Xalan Xerces-J Xerces-C Xerces-P Xindice   Please send your vote results to [EMAIL PROTECTED].   ----- Original Message ----- From: Ted Leung To: general@xml.apache.org ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; xerces-j-dev@xml.apache.org ; xerces-c-dev@xml.apache.org ; xerces-p-dev@xml.apache.org ; xalan-dev@xml.apache.org ; cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; fop-dev@xml.apache.org ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; soap-dev@xml.apache.org ; batik-dev@xml.apache.org ; security-dev@xml.apache.org ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; rpc-dev@xml.apache.org ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 11:12 AM Subject: xml.apache.org refactoring #1 Greetings all,   From our discussion last December, it seems clear to me that most of the subprojects are not interested in becoming top-level projects.  It also seems clear that people are interested broad based representation in the XML PMC.   I think that the best way to improve the issues related to project oversight is to have a series of small refactorings.  So here's my proposal for the first refactoring:   We ask each subproject to nominate 1 (or 2) people from that project to be a part of the XML PMC.  From my experience, I think that it will be better to have 2 people rather than one in order to share workload, etc.   I believe that both Axis (is Axis planning on taking SOAP with it) and Cocoon are in the process of creating their own PMC's.  They would obviously be exempt from this.   I know that we're going to have some discussion about this (lets keep it in general@) -- I encourage it -- but I've also noticed that things tend to peter out after while and nothing happens, so I want to have an endmarker.  I propose to limit discussion on this proposal until next Friday Jan 24.  If this proposal is still being considered on the 24th, then I'd propose that the subprojects nominate their folks by the following Friday, Jan 31.   Ted