On Apr 4, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
David,
Thanks for the explanation. I think the lesson learned is the (P)
PMC needs to be more transparent which I expect was an oversight
because things were working so well :-)
A little too good it seems :) Very happy we got this out there and
cleared up.
I have to say that the discussion on the topic has been really good
and shows some good community dynamics. I think the progress made
on OpenEJB3 has been spectacular (hats off to those on the commit
log) and I know there's been a lot of grinding on EJB2 regarding
the new Yoko work; net is that I think things are really going well.
Based on the issues raised and clarified by Jacek and Genender I
think things are in good shape and would give OpenEJB a solid +1
(even more so now than before) for graduation.
To make sure things are clear I'd suggest close the old vote and
respin a new one (with fewer comments :-)
I think that sounds good. I'll divert to Brett who started the
original vote thread and let him have the honors. We may want to let
it bake overnight just to make sure everyone across the international
dateline has a chance to get some final words in.
Thanks for shepherding this through.
Thanks for your +0, I think that is a really constructive way to say
"let's pause and talk." A good example to set.
Very best regards,
David
On Apr 4, 2007, at 2:42 PM, David Blevins wrote:
Ok, so here's the how/when/who info:
The link posted by Brett contains the who/when:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/incubator-
info.txt
The order goes basically (as shows in that document):
Henri, Brett, Jason (all at the same time)
David B, David J (all at the same time)
Jacek, Alan, Dain (all at the same time)
And, yes, that was all done through voting and, no, I don't just
get to pick -- I get one vote like everyone.
The three initial people brought in 2 people, the resulting 5
brought in 3 more people, the resulting 7 haven't brought in
anyone yet but it's bound to happen any day now.
As far as "why", again I can't say why others but me voted they
way they did. It was pretty much "hey how about so-and-so"
followed by a bunch of +1s. No one has been proposed and denied.
I personally have proposed 3 people (Jacek, Alan, Dain) because we
needed more people on the PPMC for legal oversite (IMHO, 5 +1s is
the practical minumum). I didn't propose more because I thought
it wise to let the "next wave" have a chance to propose people as
they saw fit.
Hope that helps.
-David
