incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Accept Stratos proposal as an incubating project
Date Mon, 17 Jun 2013 04:27:25 GMT
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
> Please don't apologize for a change that is proper and Right. In fact,
> when you look at the *actual* change, it is awesome. It is a clear
> benefit for the podling and project, and a demonstration of WSO2's
> generosity around the trademarks that it has worked to build.
> There should not be a need to apologize for Doing The Right Thing.
> I find it Wrong that others should make you feel like you've done
> something wrong. Grrr.
> Great first steps for Marvin before the Board votes him to be the new
> IPMC Chair. :-(

The Incubator has started to acquire a habit of altering proposals while VOTEs
are underway.  In my opinion, the principle that we VOTE on frozen proposals
with fixed language is worth an occasional protest vote.

Arguably, personnel VOTE threads which duplicate the +1s expressed in a
preceding DISCUSSION thread are wasteful, since the only meaningful action is
a subsequent Board ACK in response to a VP request.  Podling graduation votes
are similar in that they gauge consensus and yield a recommendation but the
only meaningful action is a subsequent Board resolution.  Podling *proposal*
votes, however, are different because they do not trigger an escalation to the
Board, but instead set a long chain of events in action supervised by the
Incubator alone.

The Incubator has previously experienced significant problems when
controversies have arisen over the legitimacy of podling proposals which were
not thoroughly vetted.  The IPMC can take weeks and hundreds of emails to hash
out the meaning of a disputed proposal.  I don't know about anybody else, but
I've started spending a little more time on proposal review in the hopes of
avoiding another such fiasco.

That said, I may have miscalibrated the numeric value of my protest vote.  I
deliberately did *not* vote -1 or request that the VOTE be cancelled because
that would have been stupid overkill.  My goal was to reach the membership of
the IPMC with a gentle reminder (the third this month) that ostensibly, we
VOTE on "final" proposals[1] rather than moving targets.  Reaching Sanjiva was
unintended; the error was neglecting to mark the wiki page as "final" before
the VOTE was kicked off -- not the subsequent edit.

It's inconceivable to me that this will have an ounce of impact on either
someone of Sanjiva's accomplishments or a future podling with the momentum of
Stratos, but to ensure that my positive assessment is communicated
unequivocally to one and all in the VOTE tally as it was during the PROPOSAL
thread, I hereby change the value of my vote from -0 to +0.99999.

I suppose it remains to be seen whether this remedy will suffice to reassure
any Board members whose faith may have been shaken by this incident, though.

Marvin Humphrey


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

View raw message