----- Original Message -----
From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 2:53 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Amendment to Commons Charter
> "Waldhoff, Rodney" wrote:
> >
> > The Commons charter (http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/charter.html)
> > currently states (in the Guidelines section):
> >
> > "17. New packages may be proposed to the Jakarta Commons mailing list.
To be
> > accepted, a package proposal must receive a positive super-majority vote
of
> > the subproject committers. Proposals are to identify the rationale for
the
> > package, its scope, its interaction with other packages and products,
the
> > Commons resources, if any, to be created, the initial source from which
the
> > package is to be created, and the initial set of committers.
> >
> > "1. The whole number of positive votes needed for a super majority is
> > calculated by dividing the total number of active subproject committers
by
> > four, multiplying by three, and rounding to the nearest whole number (>=
.5
> > rounds up)."
> >
> > It has been suggested by several committers that this guideline is
> > undesirable due to the number of votes required to accept a proposal.
(This
> > suggestion is backed up by the observation that, despite what you see in
the
> > CVS repository, currently no Commons proposal has been accepted
according to
> > this metric.)
>
> <shhhhh>
>
> >
> > Hence I suggest that we amend the commons charter as follows:
> >
> > Strike out the existing Guideline #17 (and 17.1) and replace it with:
> >
> > "17. Accepting New Packages and Components
> >
> > "17.1. New packages may be proposed to the Jakarta Commons mailing list.
> > Proposals are to identify the rationale for the package, its scope, its
> > interaction with other packages and products, the Commons resources, if
any,
> > to be created, the initial source from which the package is to be
created,
> > and the initial set of committers.
>
> Do we wish to require a current Commons committer as a 'champion'?
+1
>
> >
> > "17.2. Any Developer may vote on any proposal. However, the only binding
> > votes are those cast by a Committer to the Commons subproject.
> >
+1
> > "17.3. Seven days (168 hours) after a proposal is submitted, if it has
> > received at least three binding +1 votes and no binding -1 votes, the
> > proposal is accepted.
> >
> > "17.4. At any time after seven days (168 hours) from the time a proposal
is
> > submitted, if it has received a positive super majority of binding votes
> > cast, the proposal is accepted.
> >
> > "17.4.1. The whole number of positive votes needed for a super majority
as
> > described in 17.4 is calculated by dividing the total number of binding
> > votes cast by four, multiplying by three, and rounding to the nearest
whole
> > number (>= .5 rounds up).
> >
> > "17.5. If at any time a proposal receives a positive super majority of
all
> > subproject Committers, the proposal is accepted.
> >
> > "17.5.1. The whole number of positive votes needed for a super majority
as
> > described in 17.5 is calculated by dividing the total number of Commons
> > subproject Committers by four, multiplying by three, and rounding to the
> > nearest whole number (>= .5 rounds up)."
> >
>
> Of course I am game- however, I got lost in the 17.3->17.5.1
>
> How about just requiring 75% (rounded up) of committer votes cast during
> the voting window with a minimum of 3 +1 votes.
>
+1
> What about veto?
>
> geir
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
>
