On 10/1/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Taken from the "Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire" thread:
- The Incubator PMC sets the Mentors, who form the initial PPMC
- The PPMC (Mentors) elects additional PPMC members
- The PPMC elects Committers
This also implies changing t
On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 11:32:44AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> -1. I think your response is extremely misguided. In this situation, we
> would accept code without allowing the people who contributed it further
> access: that is completely unfair.
>
> If we do not accept the people, we don'
On 10/1/06, Mads Toftum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 11:32:44AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> -1. I think your response is extremely misguided. In this situation,
we
> would accept code without allowing the people who contributed it further
> access: that is completel
On 10/1/06, Mads Toftum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If we do not accept the people, we don't accept the code. -- justin
So are you suggesting we boot out a project like xxx? or are
you happy with incubator projects being fully open for companies
stacking their employees in to "own" a proj
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>
>> Justin has raised a concern that we not create an unfair or insulting
>> barrier existing, active. committers on communities joining the
>> ASF. Robert and I have independently expressed our views that this
>> won't do so.
>
> -1. I think your response is extremel
On Oct 1, 2006, at 11:26 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Taken from the "Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire" thread:
- The Incubator PMC sets the Mentors, who form the initial PPMC
- The PPMC (Mentors) elects additional PPMC members
- The PPMC elects Committers
This also implies changing t
On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 02:01:31PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Yes, we do not accept a project if we're not prepared to grant commit access
> to those who have worked on the code. Again, the perception we are on the
> verge of fostering is that the meritocracy only happens here and for
> com
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
The people listed in the proposal as committers are the PPMC. If some
project allows too many people to jump on the proposal at the beginning
in order to make the proposal look better to Apache, then they are stuck
with the results. Don't like that answer? Then dissolve
Hmpf.
On Oct 1, 2006, at 8:26 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Taken from the "Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire" thread:
- The Incubator PMC sets the Mentors, who form the initial PPMC
- The PPMC (Mentors) elects additional PPMC members
- The PPMC elects Committers
I would say this is pa
On Oct 1, 2006, at 2:26 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Taken from the "Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire" thread:
- The Incubator PMC sets the Mentors, who form the initial PPMC
- The PPMC (Mentors) elects additional PPMC members
- The PPMC elects Committers
This also implies changing t
On 1 Oct 06, at 6:38 PM 1 Oct 06, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 1, 2006, at 11:26 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Taken from the "Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire" thread:
- The Incubator PMC sets the Mentors, who form the initial PPMC
- The PPMC (Mentors) elects additional PPMC members
On 10/1/06, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I do too. And with the number of projects coming in with sizeable numbers of
committers these days, I wonder how long it will be before the committers
coming in this way will outnumber those whose committership is based on (ASF
earned) merit.
There are, as I see it, 2 issues being discussed:
1. Is the Initial PPMC the Initial list of
committers noted in the proposal. I think
we've all expressed views in one way or
another.
2. The CXF-specific issue: that the initial list of
committers was not only NOT t
+1
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Berin Lautenbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 3:18 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Policy on Initial Committership
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> The people listed in the proposal as committers are
On Oct 2, 2006, at 5:28 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
-1. Of the people participating in a new project, the Mentors are
the
least capable of selecting a PPMC.
I don't think that's true. At least not in the case of CXF.
You mean it isn't always true. I agree. In general, however, it is
almost
+1
On 2 Oct 2006, at 22:02, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 2, 2006, at 5:28 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
-1. Of the people participating in a new project, the Mentors
are the
least capable of selecting a PPMC.
I don't think that's true. At least not in the case of CXF.
You mean it isn't alwa
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> Mentors have NO RIGHT and NO RESPONSIBILITY to make
> decisions on behalf of a project as if they owned the project. The
> Mentors are only there to help the project govern itself and, in
> some cases, be counted as one of the people on the PPMC.
>
++1. And I certainly
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 8:14 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Policy on Initial Committership
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> Mentors have NO RIGHT and NO RESPONSIBILITY to make
> decisions on behalf of a project as if they owned th
Newcomer, Eric wrote:
>
> A couple of things stand out to me from this: it is important to follow
> the process and treat approval of a proposal in terms of the agreement
> it represents (and carry it out accordingly) and that as Roy said
> although it may take some time in the end the right thing
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> we do not accept a project if we're not prepared to grant commit access
> to those who have worked on the code. Again, the perception we are on
> the verge of fostering is that the meritocracy only happens here and for
> communities (like Wicket) where people have earne
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Taken from the "Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire" thread:
> >
> > - The Incubator PMC sets the Mentors, who form the initial PPMC
> > - The PPMC (Mentors) elects additional PPMC members
> > - The PPMC elects Committers
> >
> > This als
Berin Lautenback wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > The people listed in the proposal as committers are the PPMC. If some
> > project allows too many people to jump on the proposal at the beginning
> > in order to make the proposal look better to Apache, then they are stuck
> > with the results.
J Aaron Farr wrote:
> I agree with Roy's approach -- let the podling deal with the
> committer issue during incubation.
Uh ... everyone is saying that we should let the podling deal with the
Committer issue during Incubation. We're only dickering over how. :-)
--- Noel
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> I don't care what the PPMC decides to do provided that it is the
> PPMC that makes the decisions and that decision is made on an Apache
> mailing list. Mentors have NO RIGHT and NO RESPONSIBILITY to make
> decisions on behalf of a project as if they owned the project. The
Once again, no piling on.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 2:47 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Policy on Initial Committership
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> &
ke committer status for people not actively doing
anything.
James Margaris
-Original Message-
From: Newcomer, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 3:25 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Policy on Initial Committership
O
On Oct 3, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
I don't care what the PPMC decides to do provided that it is the
PPMC that makes the decisions and that decision is made on an Apache
mailing list. Mentors have NO RIGHT and NO RESPONSIBILITY to make
decisions on behal
> Once again, no piling on.
Opinions appear to differ, although I'll accept that "a lot of" was
incorrect.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, fair enough - ;-)
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 4:28 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Policy on Initial Committership
> Once again, no piling on.
Opinions appear to differ, altho
On 10/3/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 3, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
>> I don't care what the PPMC decides to do provided that it is the
>> PPMC that makes the decisions and that decision is made on an Apache
>> mailing list. Ment
On Oct 3, 2006, at 1:55 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
That's why we created the PPMC == the entire set of committers of the
podling and the Mentors.
this is not policy ATM
Yes it is -- it was formally voted on during the Geronimo incubation.
They do have binding votes on everything
*exce
On 10/1/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Taken from the "Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire" thread:
- The Incubator PMC sets the Mentors, who form the initial PPMC
- The PPMC (Mentors) elects additional PPMC members
- The PPMC elects Committers
This also implies changing
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
- We want a podling to generate a community, but the first bit of
community they build (the communal decision in a proposal as to who is
allowed to commit) we decide we want to ignore. Even worse, we now
don't even want to allow them to even suggest that list - we want to
Roy wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> I wholeheartedly agree that Mentors have no right to make decisions
>> as if they owned the project. They are there to help and be part of
>> the community decision making process. However, Mentors have the only
>> binding votes. You have many times decrie
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> bootstrapping is simply a description of the only process available
> ATM. the mentors (as incubator pmc members) are the only ones on the
> project who have the binding votes required to take decisions (such as
> appointed PPMC members).
> if this process isn't goo
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> The only question is what authority is granted to the PPMC by the
> Incubator, and every podling since Geronimo has acted according to
> the policy that all decisions are made by the PPMC with a minimal
> quorum of three PMC +1 votes.
EXACTLY! A minimum of three PMC +1 v
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
> If the PPMC represents the *community* then I like it. But (for me) the
> mentors are *not* the community of the podling.
Of course not. They are there to provide guidance *AND* the necessary
official PMC oversight (AND VOTES) required for ASF decisions.
> Anything th
On Oct 4, 2006, at 7:56 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
The only question is what authority is granted to the PPMC by the
Incubator, and every podling since Geronimo has acted according to
the policy that all decisions are made by the PPMC with a minimal
quorum of three PMC +1
On 10/3/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 3, 2006, at 1:55 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>> That's why we created the PPMC == the entire set of committers of the
>> podling and the Mentors.
>
> this is not policy ATM
Yes it is -- it was formally voted on during the Geronim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
For some reason, I had the impression that there was
a phantom 'P' somewhere in the references to 'PMC'
going back and forth between Noel and Roy.
For the record, I disagree with Noel that only PMC
members (and I use the term advisedly) have binding
v
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>> The only question is what authority is granted to the PPMC by the
>>> Incubator, and every podling since Geronimo has acted according to
>>> the policy that all decisions are made by the PPMC with a minimal
>>> quorum of
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> For the record, I disagree with Noel that only PMC
> members (and I use the term advisedly)
which term?
> have binding votes. My belief is that only PPMC members have
> binding votes, and that all committers should automatically
> be on the PPMC.
Those are two s
Isn't there a rule that the community should be diverse, i.e. not
dependent on one company? How doesn't this affect the proposal's
initial list of committers/ppmc members?
Martijn
On 10/1/06, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/1/06, Mads Toftum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun,
43 matches
Mail list logo
