On 25/02/2009, at 1:40 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
Instead of asking how community votes would be factored into the
final result,
you constructed a hypothetical that frames the PMC as a
dictatorship, doing as
it pleases regardless of community feedback. You then use this
hypothetical to
draw the absurd conclusion that "community votes are irrelevant"
and then seek
an explicit refutation.
My framing of this question matches the framing used in the Apache Way
excerpt that Noah included; to whit:
However, the basic rule is that only PMC members have binding votes,
and all others are either discouraged from voting (to keep the noise
down) or else have their votes considered of an indicative or
advisory nature only.
This was not an attack on the PMC, and it was not what I was thinking
when asking that question. It seemed to me that on the surface of it,
the process didn't match some underlying reality, and this except
shows that to be true. According to the Apache Way, community votes
aren't relevant to the outcome, in exactly the sense I meant. And
considering the purpose of voting, that's a good thing. Apache
discourages non-PMC members from voting.
I don't see this, or any other issue, as the PMC vs. anyone. This
project is covered in Apache goodness now.
Antony Blakey
--------------------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787
Don't anthropomorphize computers. They hate that.
