incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Bannert <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] PPMCs for Incubating Projects
Date Tue, 16 Dec 2003 05:31:28 GMT
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 02:16:49PM +0100, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

[snip everything above that I agree with]
> Incubator PMC members not engaged in active discussion and development 
> on a project are on the project PPMC in quality of observers. They 
> should refrain from voting on PPMC decisions unless really necessary, 
> thus acting as vetoers of last resort.
> Development and discussions go on the dev lists, where the Mentors are 
> the ones doing active oversight.

These two sub-sections are contradictory. Since technical decisions
should not be occuring on any PMC list*, it is not necessary that PMCers
be technical contributors. It is completely possible that non-technical
contributions earn someone an invitation to a particular PMC (eg.
document contributors).

I don't agree that Incubator PMC members should only be second-class
PPMCers. If an Incubator PMC member wishes to volunteer their time
to participate as a seed PMC member on the new PPMC, then they
should be a first-class member.

(*in some rare cases technical discussions might happen on some PMC list
in order to avoid public disclosure of a sensitive topic -- eg. security
vulnerabilities. In general, however, technical discussions should always
stay on the development list.)

> The status update occurs on the PPMC list. Thus, the notion of reporting 
> to the "main Incubator PMC" is a non-issue, as all Incubator PMC members 
> are also on the PPMC.

I also disagree with this. The purpose of the report is to present
a condensed view of the happenings within a project so that others
can see how things are going. If they are only posted to the PPMC list,
then who will be the audience? These reports should be going to


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message