[steering-discuss] FYI: Apache Incubator is now voting

Hi all,

I just wanted to bring an "FYI" that the Apache Incubator has begun
its voting process on accepting the OO.o proposal to become a
"podling" within the Incubator. At the moment, it appears to be
passing by a huge margin, with only two dissenting votes[1] at this
time.

The Apache process recognizes two types of votes:

* "binding" votes are from those who have a recognized ability to
participate in the process. These votes are the ones which will be
counted.

* "non-binding" votes are from other participants in the conversation.
Their "votes" are allowed as a measure and gauge over the broader
community opinion, even though they will not actually be tallied in
the final ballot.

If you wish to make your voice heard, then I would encourage you to
respond to the [VOTE] thread on general@incubator.apache.org (I would
think gmane[2] is your best way to respond to the thread without
having to actually subscribe).

Cheers,
-g

[1] the dissenting votes are non-binding, fwiw
[2] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general/29904

ps. my advance apologies if you feel this post is inappropriate for
these two TDF forums. I felt obliged to include you all in this
process, though I do understand that it may not be welcome.

Hi all,

I just wanted to bring an "FYI" that the Apache Incubator has begun
its voting process on accepting the OO.o proposal to become a
"podling" within the Incubator.

Thanks for the update
[...]

If you wish to make your voice heard, then I would encourage you to
respond to the [VOTE] thread on general@incubator.apache.org (I would
think gmane[2] is your best way to respond to the thread without
having to actually subscribe).

I think I had the opportunities, as a guest fof he incubator mailing
list to expression my opinions and sometimes more :wink:
At this point, I feel it would be over-staying my welcome to interject
myself in an Apache procedural vote.

Have fun and Good luck with your brand new 'massive' baby :slight_smile:

Norbert

Hi :slight_smile:
I am sure you are welcome to stay in even if it's only to help iron-out any
misunderstandings as they arise but if you don't feel comfortable then don't.
Sounds like you have been doing good work :slight_smile:
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

...
I think I had the opportunities, as a guest fof he incubator mailing
list to expression my opinions and sometimes more :wink:
At this point, I feel it would be over-staying my welcome to interject
myself in an Apache procedural vote.

Heh. You would not be over-staying, and your continued input would
always be welcome (at least to myself, even though I tend to disagree
with you :slight_smile:

Have fun and Good luck with your brand new 'massive' baby :slight_smile:

We're going to need that luck. Thank you :slight_smile:

Cheers,
-g

Hi :slight_smile:
Thanks :slight_smile: The voting system sounds interesting. I like the idea of
"non-binding" votes for people that might not have joined as proper members yet
but might have significant interest in the Apache Foundation.
Thanks and regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

Hi,

* "non-binding" votes are from other participants in the conversation.
Their "votes" are allowed as a measure and gauge over the broader
community opinion, even though they will not actually be tallied in
the final ballot.

It's true that this could be a good way to "take the temperature" in
the community about issues being voted on... Maybe our LibreOffice SC
could think about this before the bylaws are fully stabilized?

Hi Greg,

my advance apologies if you feel this post is inappropriate for
these two TDF forums. I felt obliged to include you all in this
process, though I do understand that it may not be welcome.

Thanks for informing on the TDF-lists, always welcome in such objective way.

I would recommend the members of the TDF to cast their votes.

Thank you

Volker

This is not a matter of bylaws.
Such non-binding voting is 'already', if you want, in the bylaws in
the sens that such 'non-biding vote' are an expression
of free speech but are not counted toward the final tally. In that
regard that is fully compatible
with the current bylaws.

Furthermore the bylaws are 'fully stabilized', and substantially have
been so for few months now.
changing/adding anything substantial at this point would mean doing
the whole English-German translation dance with
legal review... iow delay that much more the paperwork for the
official legal registration of the Foundation.

And if it wasn't for all that I would still suggest that bylaws should
codify the 'minimum' required to maintain a functioning
Foundation in case of discord... It should not be an attempt to codify
_everything_ we do.

Such 'tradition' (like the non-biding vote at Apache for example), is
a matter of collective culture, something that evolve organically
by tacit consensus... over time.

You may have noticed that there is no 'biding -'1 in the current vote
so far (unless I missed one)
my understanding, is that they function a bit like a standard organization:
such a -1 is required to be accompanied with precise objections... and
in that case an attempt will be made to resolve such objections..
that is the 'consensus' model. So member with biding-vote that don't
actively support the proposal, but don't want to delay the proceedings
because their objections have already been expressed and cannot be
'resolved'.... tend to vote 0
(that is my perception of things.. I only have had few days to observe
the Apache process... so I could be wrong).
So you should not see such vote as a 'survey of the force in presence'
but as a 'search where the consensus lies'

Norbert

PS: I don't think it is a good way to 'take the temperature' in the
community. it is just, maybe, a good way to take the temperature among
the people that follow a particular thread in a particular mailing
list.
PS2: you can check the Apache bylaws, you'll see that there is nothing
in there about biding/non-biding votes.

Hi,

And if it wasn't for all that I would still suggest that bylaws should
codify the 'minimum' required to maintain a functioning
Foundation in case of discord... It should not be an attempt to codify
_everything_ we do.

+1 .. if we did otherwise, we would not be able to survive in an always changing world.

Such 'tradition' (like the non-biding vote at Apache for example), is
a matter of collective culture, something that evolve organically
by tacit consensus... over time.

You may have noticed that there is no 'biding -'1 in the current vote
so far (unless I missed one)

I currently count 2. But am no expert for Apache procedures either.

André

Such 'tradition' (like the non-biding vote at Apache for example), is
a matter of collective culture, something that evolve organically
by tacit consensus... over time.

You may have noticed that there is no 'biding -'1 in the current vote
so far (unless I missed one)

I currently count 2. But am no expert for Apache procedures either.

I count three. Decisions such as this one are by majority rule. Overview of the process here:

http://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg29185.html

A full detail of the results of the vote will posted in about 27 hours.

André

- Sam Ruby