Hi Jean, On May 30, 2007, at 8:11 AM, Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote:Hi Carl, On May 30, 2007, at 6:14 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:One more question on this topic as I have also seen differing viewsfrom different members of the Incubator PMC on: "Who can and who cannot send the account setup mail to root?" Given each new committer vote will have 3 PMC votes, why does amentor have to send the account setup to root? Why can't the mail to root just contain a link to the vote result with 3 PMC members on itfrom the general list?This is a question that I believe only infrastructure can answer. Theissue is that right now, "root" has to respond only to emails from PMC chairs, and it's easy to verify that it's really the PMC chair sendingthe request.In the general PMC case, "root" responds to requests from PMC members:"The project PMC needs to send an email to root at apache.org requesting a new account to be created" [1]. It says "project PMC" not "project PMCchair".
Thanks for the correction. I need to remind myself to read the entire documentation every time, and not rely on memory. ;-)
But I think the issue is that PPMCs aren't real PMCs,
Right.
so for the Incubator the request should come from a mentor.
I'd prefer to say that the request must come from an incubator pmc member. But then the ppmc member who is managing the new committer process should ask an incubator pmc member to make the root request, and that incubator pmc member would naturally but not necessarily be one of the podling's mentors.
Craig
-jean [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#newcommitterSome PMC members have the view that any PPMC member should be able to send the account setup to root to learn the system, others say it has to be a mentor. Cliff has kindly taken care of most of these mail for us so far so this is more theoretical, however having clarity on thisin the document would also be good as I have wondered about the reasoning behind this practice. If the mail to root has to be cc-ed to general list and PPMC and has 3 PMC votes on it then it would seem to me that it could be send by anyone.If anyone can send the request, then "root" has to do more work byverifying the vote thread, following the link provided in the message,to make sure that the request is valid.I agree that it's better for the PPMC members themselves to be able to make the request to root, but I'd have to leave it up to infrastructureto decide if they can handle it. CraigCarl. Craig L Russell wrote:Having seen this identical discussion at least half a dozen times, I've committed changes to the guides/ppmc document removing the distracting (P) from the discussion on new committers. The new text saysOnly votes cast by Incubator PMC members are binding. If the vote ispositive, and the contributor accepts the responsibility of a committer for the project, the contributor formally becomes an Apache committer. An Incubator PMC member should then follow the documented procedures to complete the process, and CC both theIncubator PMC and the PPMC when sending the necessary e-mails to root.I included the redundant "Incubator" in "Incubator PMC" simply to reinforce Noel's comment that PMC means Incubator PMC. Craig On May 29, 2007, at 8:49 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:Yoav Shapira wrote:I voted +0, not having had time to review the proposed committer'scontributions.+1 != +0I always thought (and the documentation at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html) says PPMC votes are binding.It says (P), and the (P) clearly does not belong. Notice that elsewhere itproperly says PPMC, with no (), and the places that are wrong werePMC to which someone added (P). Likewise "IPMC" should simply be PMC. There is only one PMC: the Incubator PMC. I don't know how to say this more clearly. The PPMC is not a recognized entity in the ASF Bylaws. The PMC is the legal entity, and only PMC votes count in any ASF project. PPMC members should still vote, as can othermembers of the community, but as a legal matter, only PMC votes arebinding. This is not Incubator policy, it is how the ASF works.It is the same in Jakarta, for example, where any Jakarta Committerwho isn't on the PMC can vote, but only Jakarta PMC votes count. For years people didn't understand this, but please understand that Jakarta is thesource of many of the wrong and bad practices in ASF projects thatdidn't go through either the HTTP Server project or the Incubator.the documentation link above is out of date.It was never "in date". It is wrong, regardless of date. --- Noel------------------------------------------------------------------ -- -To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Craig RussellArchitect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/ products/ jdo408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!-------------------------------------------------------------------- -To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Craig RussellArchitect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/ jdo408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
