On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Craig Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com> wrote: > There is a sorta technical reason for the Champion to be a member of the PMC > of the sponsor. > > I’d expect the Champion to subscribe to the private@ list and to have > binding votes on podling releases. These both require PMC membership. > > The alternative is to create two different “exceptions” that would allow > Champions to subscribe to private@ and to have binding release votes.
These are legitimate concerns that would need to be dealt should such an unlikely scenario arise. However, I don't think we need to carve exceptions into policy here -- other creative solutions are available, like voting the Champion onto the Sponsor PMC. And I'd like to take this opportunity to make a more general point: Policy should be simple. There are many reasons that policy should be simple, and I'm sure others will be happy to weigh in with their own favorites. But for me, this is the most compelling: Complexity harms newcomers. Right now, Apache's rules are so complex that we are all in perpetual violation. You can't even know what all the rules are! In such an environment, success is dependent, not on your own ability, but on securing alliances with powerful insiders who can help you bend or break the rules. This state of affairs is not worthy of our core principles. Particularly since the ASF does not exercise technical control over its projects, what we do here is not really that complicated. Apache, and the Incubator in particular, welcomes newcomers. It should be possible for a newcomers to discover and follow our rules largely through their own efforts. Of course a rejoinder to "Policy should be simple" is "As simple as possible and no simpler". But how close are we to "as simple as possible"? Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
