On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:32 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> > wrote: > > No. > > I disagree. Please see the discussion on private@incubator for more > context. I'd be happy to see you reopen the question on general@incubator > if you feel strongly about having a truly public discussion. > > > Votes to admit (or expunge) the roster should never be by lazy consensus. > > I think the IPMC (or Board, in the post-incubation TLP world) would > express > > serious reservations. Please vote, folks, we need 3 +1's on such issues, > > but it should reflect a clear plurality. > > This one is a special case of "amending" an existing proposal. > We might be talking past one another... I've read the entire back-channel discussion, no reason to rehash, unless we took away different understandings. I disagreed with your use of the term 'lazy consensus'. Ask for consensus (you'll receive it, I'm sure). Lazy consensus means that it will be changed baring an objection. That means that not even three people are needed to change the roster, and that would be a poor choice. [Note: the project chair *can* unilaterally change a project roster, they were tasked with managing the committee on behalf of the IPMC or Board of Directors, but they almost never have. An example might be constituting a new committee from a completely inactive roster into the one of the few participating project folks.] It was decided the proposal would not be amended, that projects need to get it right off the bat. And it was decided that the project should vote in these committers and/or PPMC members as we will any new adds. We can do that as an entire slate, that's fine. If you hold a public vote to make them committers, they are not on the PPMC. If you hold a private vote, likewise. If you hold a vote to make them committers as well as PPMC members, and send the new list of PPMC members to the IPMC as lazy concensus of the roster change, then they become both. I'd like to see that happen. These words matter in voting, and we might as well get them right every time a new committer and/or [P]PMC member is suggested. Hopefully, we are just tripping over words, and have the same goal. Bill
