On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The first idea should be fairly straightforward: that for > the projects I participate in (so far thrift and sis), that > the IPMC delegates to the PPMC the decision-making process > for voting in new committers: basically rolling back the clock > to May 1, 2007 on guides/ppmc.html. Please refrain from that phrase; since it is debatable what was the actual policy previously. I am +1 to the suggestion that Thrift and Sis are empowered to be self-governing in respect to committers. I am even positive to do this across all podlings, if roo@ is ok with it. > The second idea is more controversial: to hold IPMC votes to > admit all significant committers to those projects to the IPMC > itself. The purpose of this concept is to allow those who > best know the codebase to provide IPMC oversight over it, > especially as it pertains to releases. Yes, definitely more controversial. Pros would include greater exposure to the Incubator noise, learning from others, becoming part of Apache for real. The main cons is that doesn't happen and instead we have podlings inadvertently becomes even more isolated islands, as they no longer required to get others involved at all. Let's try this with Thrift and Sis, as Thrift is always quoted as a troubled community, no releases and so forth. If it will work for that podling, I am convinced. If it doesn't work for either, then I think we need some other mechanism. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
