On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Jacques Le Roux > > <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > >> Who will update the https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html > page?* > > > > I've done that, it now says "In general, committer elections are > > majority approval votes, as described on the Apache Voting Process > > page" with a link. > > That's not my understanding. It's not what I've heard from the Board > over the years, particularly from Greg. And I believe that it's for a > very good reason that personnel votes at Apache are not majority rule: > majority rule forces a result rather than creates consensus. > I dislike all voting, yes. Consensus through discussion is definitely a better approach. Concretely: I don't think there is any specific recommendation for how a PMC/community decides upon new committers. I've seen many mechanisms. In fact, within Apache Subversion, a committer can be added by any *singular* PMC member, no vote required (but their resulting commit rights are limited). For PMC Members, Roy has stated [on general@incubator, on 1/31/2012] that: "Well, it boils down to the fact that making someone a PMC member gives them veto power over the changes you make. The only way that works socially is if everyone currently on the PMC agrees that person is a peer." >... Cheers, -g
