I'm watching the "renaming" vote thread and I find it odd that folks are -1-ing the project's vote. I've read the role of the IPMC[1] and the policy[2] and can't find the basis for our (IPMC) doing anything other than ack-ing they're vote. It seems like votes from the IPMC should only be relevant/binding when the matter in question is release/legal/trademark/etc-type issues that could [legally] effect the foundation. I dunno, this seems purely a project matter to me (like a logo, code, etc.) - second-guessing a project team on these sort of subjective things seems counter-productive to grooming self-sustaining projects to me. So, is this normal - why does the IPMC really get anything more than an "advising" role in these sorts of matters (and why is that healthy)?
Thanks, --tim [1] - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Incubator+Project+Management+Committee+%28PMC%29 [2] - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Incubation+Policy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
