CFV: Nominate Andrew Haley as jdk6 Project Lead
iris.clark at oracle.com
Wed Jan 30 21:25:40 UTC 2013
> Why do the members of a group get to determine the project lead, rather than the members of said project?
That's the way that it's specified in the Bylaws:
When a Project is created, or when its Project Lead resigns or departs, candidates for a new Project Lead may be nominated by the Group Leads of a Project’s Sponsoring Groups. Such a nomination must be approved by a Three-Vote Consensus of these Group Leads. If agreement amongst these Group Leads cannot be reached then the OpenJDK Lead will select one of the nominees; this decision may be appealed to the Governing Board.
From: Andrew Hughes [mailto:gnu.andrew at redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 10:52 AM
To: Kelly O'Hair
Cc: discuss at openjdk.java.net; jdk6-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: CFV: Nominate Andrew Haley as jdk6 Project Lead
----- Original Message -----
> I nominate Andrew Haley as the new jdk6 Project Lead. According to the
> bylaws on project leads  the Group Leads of the sponsoring project
> gets to nominate and vote. The only sponsoring group is the Build
> Group (that would be me :^).
>  http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#project-lead
However, this raises an interesting point. Why do the members of a group get to determine the project lead, rather than the members of said project?
By these rules, the implication is that, for example, Dalibor solely gets to determine the leads of Caciocavallo, IcedTea, Zero, BSD-port, MacOS X port, the PPC-AIX port, the MIPS port and the proposed AArch64 port. This doesn't make sense to me.
I also don't see a single group lead by someone outside Oracle.
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07
More information about the discuss