Well, isn't that a weak argument, since said company already have majority
and with vetoes can also block to loose such majority. If this happens, I
would assume that someone in the PMC would bring it to Board's attention to
look into the matter, as the only course of action against a malevolent
company taking control of a project, no matter which voting system you
apply.

Cheers
Niclas

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Joseph Schaefer <
joe_schae...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

> The downside to majority rule when it comes to personnel voting is that it
> can lead to a situation where a company having a majority on the pmc can
> increase their majority by voting in additional employees without the
> minority having any way to provide a check on that exercise of power.  Yes
> this has come up in the past.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:03 PM, Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > on https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#new-committer-process
> it
> > describes the process of bringing in a new committer for a "typical
> > project".
> >
> > But in the "Discussion" it speaks of "3 +1 and no vetoes"... Is it really
> > "typical" that projects use vetoes for new committers? I can't recall
> > seeing that anywhere, not saying it is incorrect, but asking whether it
> > really is "typical".
> >
> > Perhaps we should provide links to a handful of well-known project's
> > processes, to both give a template for projects to work with as well as
> > different approaches.
> >
> > Anyone has any opinion on this matter?
> >
> > Cheers
> > --
> > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> > http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java

Reply via email to