On 10/29/02 2:53 PM, "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 11:22, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >> >> And that was considered a *vote*?? > > It was more of an opinion poll - and most people were positive about > this ( and expressed that with a +1 ). > > In a later message I asked to postpone this - until the issues become > clear ( naming, legal, etc ) > Great. Perfect description. Not disputing the general sentiment (I still think it's moving deck chairs around if you move every committer into the PMC). My problem was simply that representing to reorg@ that there was a vote in which the jakarta commons committers decided to form a PMC-ish structure was not correct. > The open questions are: > - can jakarta PMC recognize jakarta-commons SPMC and delegate oversight > officially ? Good question, and I donšt see why we couldn't ask, although.... > - if that's not possible, can jakarta-commons form a PMC and ask the > ASF board to recognize it ? ( it seems implied that tomcat or ant could > do that easily ). If so, can it remain part of jakarta ( and eventually > extend/merge with xml.apache.org ) Yes, it could. I would really be against J-C separating from jakarta in any way. Renaming all committers to be members of the PMC again seems like window dressing until you educate those committers about their responsibilities - where I then wonder if there is education to be done, why don't we just do it? > - technical details: who is part of the SPMC ( my initial proposal was > 'all active committers who like to be', maybe with a 1-2 month delay for > very new committers ). I'm sure other opinions will be raised on this. This is why I think it's window dressing - why would you *not* allow a committer to be participant in the PMC? Would that reason, whatever it is, be a reason for them not to be a committer? Don't we believe that when we make someone a committer, its because they have shown they share the vision and are willing to take responsibilty? It's more than just the ability to 'cvs commit'. Just curious - I am asking the same questions about HTTPD and APD, as it sounds like it's pretty much the same thing. They assure me it's not, for example the HTTPD PMC election is based on 'merit', where the Jakarta PMC is a 'popularity contest', but no one has yet to define the difference. To me, merit would be objective, popularity would be subjective. However, there are no objective measures of merit here, only opinions of those voting. (HTTPD has the curious feature that only the existing PMC can vote in new members, not the rest of the community... I have yet to ask about that....) My work in Velocity is really valuable to some people (like myself :), but someone else, say someone working on Jasper, might not think so and believe it is anti-Apache, for example, as one of it's benefits is to 'undermine' a standard, JSP, through the offering of an alternative. -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-203-355-2219 (w) Adeptra Inc. +1-203-247-1713 (m) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
