| He knows as he was invited to join from the start, but he had some concerns about the differing IP requirements under the Jakarta process and it took him a while to be comfortable with the contributor agreement. We will just kick it off again next week.
We can start one for Jean-Louis as well.
From Wayne's
Blog:
According to our election rules, an election ends when either
everybody votes in the affirmative or seven days has passed. If
at the end of the election we have at least three affirmative
votes and no negative votes, the vote is considered successful
and it passed on to the PMC for approval (note that when a
project has fewer than three committers, success is declared if
everybody votes in the affirmative).
Alternatively, the project can be declared "dysfunctional" and
committers may be appointed. I don't think this is the case for
CDI. I agree with the previous responses, I recommend that you hold
the election again. I hope Mark knows that we'd welcome his
contributions.
-- Ed
On 9/24/2019 1:31 PM, Amelia Eiras
wrote:
A committer vote pushed during a big conference such as CodeOne
SFO is/was a bad idea.
Its current outcome has nothing to do with awesome
Mark S. but with the chosen timing. Lesson learned, let's move
forward.
I recommend start a new vote next week— many of us
are still recuperating from OC1 Scott! :)
Cheers,
Scott,
According to the
Eclipse guidelines, a committer election requires three
+1 votes (with
no -1 votes). Since your CDI team is so small, you
might need to
nudge Emily and/or Matej to cast the final +1 vote to
get Mark in. There
is no lazy consensus for committer elections.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx
Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
|
