On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: >> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or >> retiring podlings,.. > > IMO this is where independence is important. We could require that 3 > "organizationally independent" IPMC members review each podling before > graduating or retiring. Those people do not need to be project > mentors.
I much prefer a formulation of "3 independent" over "no financial ties", and would prefer such a criteria be considered whenever the impulse arises to ensure that NO involved individual has a vested interest. I'll go further and say that financial interests are but one way in which individuals have a vested interest in the success of a project, and echoing a statement by Ross -- having a vested interest is not a bad thing. Finally, I would prefer a model whereby those that have achieved ASF member status are given the benefit of the doubt in matters involving a group vote when it comes to their ability to separate their ASF role from their relationship with their employee. Nothing wrong with still requiring 3 completely independent votes, but having a rule that excludes participation by those that have demonstrated their merit as ASF members just seems wrong. - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
