On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > I'm not comfortable having a PMC Chair election and nomination on ooo-dev. >
It appears the IPMC was able to do this for their own Chair. > I also agree that we should form the PMC membership first. > See my response to Dennis on this. There is no PMC here, only a PPMC. > Regards, > Dave > > On Aug 23, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > >> I suggest that the initial Project Management Committee (PMC) needs to be >> identified before the election of a Chair from that body is undertaken. >> >> Also, this seems like a very good time to review, for the benefit of all >> here, what the duties of PMC members are and, with respect to that, what the >> specific responsibilities of the Chair are and what the special standing of >> the Chair is so its accountability can be carried out. >> >> - Dennis >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] >> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 10:36 >> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process >> >> Now that the community graduation ballot has passed, one of our next >> tasks is to identify a PMC Chair. >> >> You can read about the duties of a PMC Chair here: >> http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair >> >> How do we want to do this? >> >> A strawman proposal: >> >> 1) Nominations would be open for 72 hours. Anyone can nominate >> someone for the role. Self-nominations are fine. And of course >> nominations can be declined. >> >> 2) If there is only one nomination, then we are done, provided there >> are no sustained objections. >> >> 3) If there is more than one nomination we discuss on the list for >> another 72 hours. Discussion would primarily be on ooo-dev, but some >> subjects might be directed to ooo-private. >> >> 4) If after 72-hours discussion there are still two or more nominees >> then we vote. Everyone would be welcome to vote, but binding votes >> would be from PPMC members. If there are more than 2 candidates we >> would probably need to use a more complicated voting system, or have a >> run-off vote if none of the nominees receive an outright majority. >> >> Any improvements or alternatives to this basic scheme? >> >> Regards, >> >> -Rob >> >