Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [rt-pmc] Important: New best practices for approvals

This is a good idea, but it will not work easily in all places. E.g. the tools for CQ approval would have to be amended, same for committer approvals. It also seems to be a significant overhead if three people from the pmc have to look at every single CQ. But for votes (not approvals) this makes sense for me.

Jochen

Am 22.07.2009 um 17:00 schrieb Jesse McConnell:

why not simply require a minimum 3 [+1] votes over a minimal 72 hour period?

http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx



On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 05:03, Jochen Krause<jkrause@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear fellow PMC members,
In our last PMC call we agreed on somewhat stricter governance best
practices for approvals:
"We will avoid PMC members being the sole approver for requests/ votes from
their own project."
That means that if a project that you are directly involved in is looking for a PMC approval for a CQ, a new committer, a release or any other kind of approval you should not be the sole approver of this request. In those cases where only one person approves (CQ, committers) you should abstain from voting. Usually approvals will happen within a week, if your approval is more urgent please convince another PMC member and have him approve (first).
Jochen
###
Jochen Krause
EclipseSource

www.eclipsesource.com

_______________________________________________
rt-pmc mailing list
rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc


_______________________________________________
rt-pmc mailing list
rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc



Back to the top