Re: [DISCUSS] Graduation resolution for ManifoldCF
Hi, On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like we missed a step; we need a graduation resolution for the board to vote on. Here's my proposal, basically copied from Apache Chemistry's, but I have a question. Since no distinction is made between the PPMC members and committers in this resolution, and since many of the original committers/IPMC members have become inactive, and others have not yet been voted in as PPMC members, how should we deal with that? * Overall the resolution looks good, though note my comment on the scope below. * As discussed before, I don't think making a distinction between committers and (P)PMC members is useful for us. IMO such a setup only makes sense for umbrella projects like the Incubator and Lucene before it split out most of its subprojects. So my recommendation would be to make all (still active) committers also PMC members and stick with that policy going forward. * As for inactive people, you're already doing a good job asking them whether they still want to be involved. In case someone doesn't reply and hasn't shown up on the lists over the last year or so, it's fine to simply drop them from the resolution for lack of response. Also, do we need to vote on who the vice president will be? I believe we do... but maybe we can do this as part of the vote on the resolution itself? You're already doing all the stuff a VP should be doing, and more, so I hereby nominate you to be the VP, Apache ManifoldCF. We can have a vote if other nominations are made, or consider you selected by lazy consensus otherwise. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of open-source software providing a framework for transferring content from source content repositories to target repositories or indexes, including a security model permitting target repositories to enforce source repository security, for distribution at no charge to the public; This is a pretty lengthy scope definition. Can we simplify it a bit? For example something like: ... open-source software for transferring content between repositories or search indexes. The details of how this is achieved (framework, security model, etc.) are IMHO best left outside the scope to allow more freedom down the line for the project to evolve. RESOLVED, that the Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is responsible for the creation and maintenance of software providing a framework for transferring content from source content repositories to target repositories or indexes, including a security model permitting target repositories to enforce source repository security, for distribution at no charge to the public. This should also be updated as discussed above. PS. If you don't mind, I'd be happy to stay on board the new ManifoldCF PMC at least for some time to help out with the transition to TLP. BR, Jukka Zitting
Re: [DISCUSS] Graduation resolution for ManifoldCF
Seems reasonable; I'll revise the resolution accordingly and put it up for a vote over the next couple of hours. Thanks! Karl On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like we missed a step; we need a graduation resolution for the board to vote on. Here's my proposal, basically copied from Apache Chemistry's, but I have a question. Since no distinction is made between the PPMC members and committers in this resolution, and since many of the original committers/IPMC members have become inactive, and others have not yet been voted in as PPMC members, how should we deal with that? * Overall the resolution looks good, though note my comment on the scope below. * As discussed before, I don't think making a distinction between committers and (P)PMC members is useful for us. IMO such a setup only makes sense for umbrella projects like the Incubator and Lucene before it split out most of its subprojects. So my recommendation would be to make all (still active) committers also PMC members and stick with that policy going forward. * As for inactive people, you're already doing a good job asking them whether they still want to be involved. In case someone doesn't reply and hasn't shown up on the lists over the last year or so, it's fine to simply drop them from the resolution for lack of response. Also, do we need to vote on who the vice president will be? I believe we do... but maybe we can do this as part of the vote on the resolution itself? You're already doing all the stuff a VP should be doing, and more, so I hereby nominate you to be the VP, Apache ManifoldCF. We can have a vote if other nominations are made, or consider you selected by lazy consensus otherwise. WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of open-source software providing a framework for transferring content from source content repositories to target repositories or indexes, including a security model permitting target repositories to enforce source repository security, for distribution at no charge to the public; This is a pretty lengthy scope definition. Can we simplify it a bit? For example something like: ... open-source software for transferring content between repositories or search indexes. The details of how this is achieved (framework, security model, etc.) are IMHO best left outside the scope to allow more freedom down the line for the project to evolve. RESOLVED, that the Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is responsible for the creation and maintenance of software providing a framework for transferring content from source content repositories to target repositories or indexes, including a security model permitting target repositories to enforce source repository security, for distribution at no charge to the public. This should also be updated as discussed above. PS. If you don't mind, I'd be happy to stay on board the new ManifoldCF PMC at least for some time to help out with the transition to TLP. BR, Jukka Zitting
[VOTE] Graduation resolution for ManifoldCF
Thanks, Jukka, I'd be honored to take on the role of VP in a ManifoldCF top-level project. Incorporating Jukka's invaluable advice, I've updated the proposed resolution, and am opening a vote on it. Please vote +1 if you agree that this is the resolution that should be presented, in total, including myself in the role of Vice President, or -1 if you see changes you would like to make (or if you'd like to nominate someone else and hold a formal vote on the VP role). == WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of open-source software for transferring content between repositories or search indexes, for distribution at no charge to the public; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee (PMC), to be known as the Apache ManifoldCF Project, be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is responsible for the creation and maintenance of open-source software for transferring content between repositories or search indexes, for distribution at no charge to the public. RESOLVED, that the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF be and hereby is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache ManifoldCF Project, and to have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the scope of responsibility of the Apache ManifoldCF Project; and be it further RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache ManifoldCF Project: * Shinichiro Abe (shinich...@apache.org) * Erlend Garåsen(rid...@apache.org) * Piergiorgio Lucidi (piergior...@apache.org) * Hitoshi Ozawa (hoz...@apache.org) * Tommaso Teofili (tomm...@apache.org) * Simon Willnauer(sim...@apache.org) * Karl Wright (kwri...@apache.org) * Jukka Zitting (ju...@apache.org) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Karl Wright be appointed to the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF, to serve in accordance with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it further RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development and increased participation in the ManifoldCF Project; and be it further RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator ManifoldCF podling; and be it further RESOLVED, that all responsibility pertaining to the Apache Incubator ManifoldCF podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter discharged. == +1 from me. Thanks again for the vote of confidence! Karl On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like we missed a step; we need a graduation resolution for the board to vote on. Here's my proposal, basically copied from Apache Chemistry's, but I have a question. Since no distinction is made between the PPMC members and committers in this resolution, and since many of the original committers/IPMC members have become inactive, and others have not yet been voted in as PPMC members, how should we deal with that? * Overall the resolution looks good, though note my comment on the scope below. * As discussed before, I don't think making a distinction between committers and (P)PMC members is useful for us. IMO such a setup only makes sense for umbrella projects like the Incubator and Lucene before it split out most of its subprojects. So my recommendation would be to make all (still active) committers also PMC members and stick with that policy going forward. * As for inactive people, you're already doing a good job asking them whether they still want to be involved. In case someone doesn't reply and hasn't shown up on the lists over the last year or so, it's fine to simply drop them from the resolution for lack of response. Also, do we need to vote on who the vice president will be? I believe we do... but maybe we can do this as part of
Re: [VOTE] Graduation resolution for ManifoldCF
+1 from me :) Piergiorgio 2012/5/1 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com Thanks, Jukka, I'd be honored to take on the role of VP in a ManifoldCF top-level project. Incorporating Jukka's invaluable advice, I've updated the proposed resolution, and am opening a vote on it. Please vote +1 if you agree that this is the resolution that should be presented, in total, including myself in the role of Vice President, or -1 if you see changes you would like to make (or if you'd like to nominate someone else and hold a formal vote on the VP role). == WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance of open-source software for transferring content between repositories or search indexes, for distribution at no charge to the public; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee (PMC), to be known as the Apache ManifoldCF Project, be and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is responsible for the creation and maintenance of open-source software for transferring content between repositories or search indexes, for distribution at no charge to the public. RESOLVED, that the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF be and hereby is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache ManifoldCF Project, and to have primary responsibility for management of the projects within the scope of responsibility of the Apache ManifoldCF Project; and be it further RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache ManifoldCF Project: * Shinichiro Abe (shinich...@apache.org) * Erlend Garåsen(rid...@apache.org) * Piergiorgio Lucidi (piergior...@apache.org) * Hitoshi Ozawa (hoz...@apache.org) * Tommaso Teofili (tomm...@apache.org) * Simon Willnauer(sim...@apache.org) * Karl Wright (kwri...@apache.org) * Jukka Zitting (ju...@apache.org) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Karl Wright be appointed to the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF, to serve in accordance with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be it further RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open development and increased participation in the ManifoldCF Project; and be it further RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator ManifoldCF podling; and be it further RESOLVED, that all responsibility pertaining to the Apache Incubator ManifoldCF podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter discharged. == +1 from me. Thanks again for the vote of confidence! Karl On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like we missed a step; we need a graduation resolution for the board to vote on. Here's my proposal, basically copied from Apache Chemistry's, but I have a question. Since no distinction is made between the PPMC members and committers in this resolution, and since many of the original committers/IPMC members have become inactive, and others have not yet been voted in as PPMC members, how should we deal with that? * Overall the resolution looks good, though note my comment on the scope below. * As discussed before, I don't think making a distinction between committers and (P)PMC members is useful for us. IMO such a setup only makes sense for umbrella projects like the Incubator and Lucene before it split out most of its subprojects. So my recommendation would be to make all (still active) committers also PMC members and stick with that policy going forward. * As for inactive people, you're already doing a good job asking them whether they still want to be involved. In case someone doesn't reply and hasn't shown up on the lists over the last year or so, it's fine to simply drop them from the resolution for lack of response. Also, do we need to vote on who the vice president will
