Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Project Lead Vote for the 2011 term

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Ladislav Hagara <ladislav.hagara AT unob.cz>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Project Lead Vote for the 2011 term
  • Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:07:20 +0100

> On 02/14/2011 10:54 AM, Mark Bainter wrote:
>> George Sherwood [pilot AT beernabeer.com] wrote:
>>>> I have no issue with letting the 2nd nomination proceed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And if we do decide to let the 2nd nomination proceed, I would like to
>>> nominate a 3rd:
>>
>> I dunno, now it just seems like we're flaunting the rules. The Kowis
>> nomination came because of a discussion in channel where Kowis said he
>> had thought about throwing his name in [in the context of our lamenting
>> the lack of participation in the PL vote nominations], and we just did
>> it for him. At the time I was thinking the nominations weren't
>> officially closed until the email was sent closing them - but that
>> wasn't really the way ruskie was running it, so we were outside by 13
>> hours or so.
>>
>> This now seems like it's almost setting a precedent that says it doesn't
>> matter what the time frames are - which could make the annual votes an
>> even bigger mess than they already are sometimes.
>>
>> The rules were put in place for a reason - to give us guidelines and
>> keep order, and prevent dragging these necessary but distracting
>> administrative events out. All things being equal, these two will have
>> another chance either right away (if Emrys doesn't get the votes) or at
>> the end of that term if he does. On consideration I think I'd rather
>> that we just stick with the rules.
>>
>
> I don't mind it in this case, as long as it's an exception to the rules.
> The rules are just guidelines, if we really want to have a three-way PL
> vote, I'm 100% okay with that, especially given the lack of activity
> with SMGL.
>
> In this particular case, I don't think it's such a bad thing to "flaunt
> the rules" a bit. We have been somewhat lax in the procedural
> department, so I don't think it's so horrible this time.
>
> Also, I don't think it will happen very often, so I think this one time
> will be an exception. Usually we do have an email come out that reminds
> us that nominations are closed and that one week for acceptance speeches
> are happening and whatnot. So I can understand the desire to let more
> people in and such.
>
>
> However, the time for a decision is now. Since our current (relatively
> unofficial) PL is ruskie, we need a decision and we need to move forward.



Imho, last official announce was at [1]: David Kowis (a.k.a. dkowis,
among others) has agreed to continue in the capacity of Assistant
Project Lead. Without PL we have APL.

According to [2] we have 43 active developers. Seems most of them don't
care the vote.


[1] https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/sm-discuss/2010-March/020011.html
[2] http://www.sourcemage.org/SourceMage/Developers


--
Ladislav Hagara




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page