On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 7:45 PM, 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....
+1, but I think we should require at least one +1 from a mentor in those votes, to make sure mentors are following the action. And mentors or IPMC members making the account requests. > > 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.... Sounds good to me, having PPMC members participate in the IPMC helps cross-pollination of ideas. Here as well, I'd require the mentors to nominate those significant committers, as another way of making sure mentors are involved in the process. -Bertrand (didn't read the whole thread yet - holidays ;-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
