Re: [VOTE] Project resolution for XML Graphics

On 02.07.2004 13:31:23 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
>     So this vote is dead right?

Yes.

>     My understanding is that one '-1' and unless there are
> really exceptional circumstances it doesn't pass.
> 
> 
> 
>     I would suggest that we just drop the "controversial"
> clause, with the understanding that it's intent is still
> covered by the fact that the PMC is responsible for the
> "creation and maintenance of software for managing the
> conversion of XML formats to graphical output, and for
> related software components [...]."

+1

>     In other words the issue of migrating/rationalizing
> the code base is an excellent topic of discussion, once
> the PMC is formed.

Exactly. That's why the paragraph says: "the [..] PMC be and hereby is
tasked with the migration....". It doesn't really imply what needs to be
done and how much. As I said before, Glen, there are only a few little
things to be done besides the charter: a PMC and general project mailing
list and that's basically it. There are additional things we may do but
we don't have to.

Just for the record: The text of this proposed resolution has been
publicly available for over three months now. I've posted the URL
several times.

> It doesn't have to be (and actually
> probably shouldn't be) part of the charter of the PMC.

I agree.

Ok then, Glen, please restart the vote. I don't feel like doing this
right now.

> 
> Glen Mazza wrote:
> 
> > --- Jeremias Maerki <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> >>PART A
> >>------
> >>[ ] +1 - The attached resolution should be submitted
> >>to the 
> >>         Board for the formation of the XML Graphics
> >>project.
> >>
> >>[X] -1 - The attached resolution is not suitable.  I
> >>have a
> >>         recommendation to improve it.
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > Only problem with it, preventing me from voting +1:  
> > 
> > I would like this clause removed:
> > 
> > 
> >>RESOLVED, that the initial XML Graphics PMC be and
> >>hereby is tasked with
> >>the migration and rationalization of the Batik and
> >>FOP Apache XML
> >>subprojects; and be it further 
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > We'll discuss (read: argue ;) later what "migration
> > and rationalization", if any, needs to be done based
> > on current workload, current committer needs, etc.  I
> > haven't been convinced such changes need to be made at
> > this time, but this issue is independent from the need
> > to create an XML Graphics (which I do support).

<snip/>


Jeremias Maerki