That sounds fine to me. At least for my part, the PPMC has been
essentially invisible, so I didn't even realize the project had one.
Not being aware of that led me to wonder about the criteria used to pick
the initial list of project members. Now I know, and I'm fine with the
selections.
I really sort of agree with you about the role of the PMC. My
experience with them so far is that most of the work involves two
tasks: 1) deciding who should become committers, and 2) deciding who
should join the PMC. 1) can easily be done by the community in general,
while 2) would become unnecessary without the PMC. I'm sometimes a
little uncomfortable about the "binding vote" concept, but I think in
general if there's enough dispute that the non-binding votes would make
a difference, then there's a larger problem that needs to be solved.
Rick
David Blevins wrote:
If Apache were to pass a by-law saying PMCs are no longer required,
I'd be the first person to resign from it. However we have to have a
PMC for legal oversight reasons and will continue to add people to it,
but I personally really hope it never becomes the "core" of our
community. I hope that the core always remains right here on the dev
list where everyone, committer or not, can participate.
We have done an excellent job in this community at making sure we all
feel like we make a difference here, that someone without commit
privileges has just as much voice as someone with commit. Several
people, committers and otherwise have stood up and said so. I think
it would be a terrible tragedy to start defining the word community as
those on the PMC and to say anyone not on the PMC are being ostracize
and not part of the community.
I'm personally happy with the progress we've made for ourselves and am
fine adding more people to it over time.
How do others feel?
-David
