From mr at sun.com Wed Jan 16 15:39:38 2008 From: mr at sun.com (Mark Reinhold) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:39:38 -0800 Subject: Delayed sponsorship vote on the JDK 6 Project Proposal Message-ID: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Joe Darcy proposed the JDK 6 Project on 14 December [1]. Kelly O'Hair called for the Build Group to vote on sponsoring this Project on 7 January [2], and in due course that vote passed [3]. The interim governance rules [4] require that a Group vote to sponsor a proposed Project within 14 days, so strictly speaking this vote was invalid. (I'm sure this was an innocent mistake on Kelly's part, most likely related to Sun's week-long break over the holidays.) Rather than ask Joe to resubmit the JDK 6 Project Proposal, I hereby request the Interim Governance Board to recognize the Build Group's sponsorship vote as valid despite its tardiness. GB members: Please indicate your agreement (or not) in replies to this message. - Mark [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/announce/2007-December/000051.html [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000659.html [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000696.html [4] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/ From Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM Wed Jan 16 15:45:48 2008 From: Simon.Phipps at Sun.COM (Simon Phipps) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:45:48 +0000 Subject: Delayed sponsorship vote on the JDK 6 Project Proposal In-Reply-To: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: Seems reasonable. I agree. On Jan 16, 2008, at 23:39, Mark Reinhold wrote: > Joe Darcy proposed the JDK 6 Project on 14 December [1]. > > Kelly O'Hair called for the Build Group to vote on sponsoring this > Project on 7 January [2], and in due course that vote passed [3]. > > The interim governance rules [4] require that a Group vote to sponsor > a proposed Project within 14 days, so strictly speaking this vote was > invalid. (I'm sure this was an innocent mistake on Kelly's part, most > likely related to Sun's week-long break over the holidays.) > > Rather than ask Joe to resubmit the JDK 6 Project Proposal, I hereby > request the Interim Governance Board to recognize the Build Group's > sponsorship vote as valid despite its tardiness. > > GB members: Please indicate your agreement (or not) in replies to this > message. > > - Mark > > > [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/announce/2007-December/ > 000051.html > [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/ > 000659.html > [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/ > 000696.html > [4] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/ From fabiane at tridedalo.com.br Wed Jan 16 15:53:18 2008 From: fabiane at tridedalo.com.br (Fabiane Bizinella Nardon) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:53:18 -0200 Subject: Delayed sponsorship vote on the JDK 6 Project Proposal In-Reply-To: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: <478E98EE.1050202@tridedalo.com.br> I agree. Fabiane Mark Reinhold wrote: > Joe Darcy proposed the JDK 6 Project on 14 December [1]. > > Kelly O'Hair called for the Build Group to vote on sponsoring this > Project on 7 January [2], and in due course that vote passed [3]. > > The interim governance rules [4] require that a Group vote to sponsor > a proposed Project within 14 days, so strictly speaking this vote was > invalid. (I'm sure this was an innocent mistake on Kelly's part, most > likely related to Sun's week-long break over the holidays.) > > Rather than ask Joe to resubmit the JDK 6 Project Proposal, I hereby > request the Interim Governance Board to recognize the Build Group's > sponsorship vote as valid despite its tardiness. > > GB members: Please indicate your agreement (or not) in replies to this > message. > > - Mark > > > [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/announce/2007-December/000051.html > [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000659.html > [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000696.html > [4] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/ > > > From dl at cs.oswego.edu Wed Jan 16 16:02:40 2008 From: dl at cs.oswego.edu (Doug Lea) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:02:40 -0500 Subject: Delayed sponsorship vote on the JDK 6 Project Proposal In-Reply-To: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: <478E9B20.8000400@cs.oswego.edu> I agree and vote yes. -Doug Mark Reinhold wrote: > Joe Darcy proposed the JDK 6 Project on 14 December [1]. > > Kelly O'Hair called for the Build Group to vote on sponsoring this > Project on 7 January [2], and in due course that vote passed [3]. > > The interim governance rules [4] require that a Group vote to sponsor > a proposed Project within 14 days, so strictly speaking this vote was > invalid. (I'm sure this was an innocent mistake on Kelly's part, most > likely related to Sun's week-long break over the holidays.) > > Rather than ask Joe to resubmit the JDK 6 Project Proposal, I hereby > request the Interim Governance Board to recognize the Build Group's > sponsorship vote as valid despite its tardiness. > > GB members: Please indicate your agreement (or not) in replies to this > message. > > - Mark > > > [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/announce/2007-December/000051.html > [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000659.html > [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000696.html > [4] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/ > From robilad at kaffe.org Wed Jan 16 16:14:25 2008 From: robilad at kaffe.org (Dalibor Topic) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 01:14:25 +0100 Subject: Delayed sponsorship vote on the JDK 6 Project Proposal In-Reply-To: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: <478E9DE1.5040704@kaffe.org> Mark Reinhold wrote: > Joe Darcy proposed the JDK 6 Project on 14 December [1]. > > Kelly O'Hair called for the Build Group to vote on sponsoring this > Project on 7 January [2], and in due course that vote passed [3]. > > The interim governance rules [4] require that a Group vote to sponsor > a proposed Project within 14 days, so strictly speaking this vote was > invalid. (I'm sure this was an innocent mistake on Kelly's part, most > likely related to Sun's week-long break over the holidays.) > > Rather than ask Joe to resubmit the JDK 6 Project Proposal, I hereby > request the Interim Governance Board to recognize the Build Group's > sponsorship vote as valid despite its tardiness. > > GB members: Please indicate your agreement (or not) in replies to this > message. I agree with recognizing the vote. Rationale: No build group Member challenged the validity of the vote. It passed without No votes by Members. So I think it's unlikely that a re-vote would result in a different outcome, from the one already expressed by its Members, in particular since the discussion of the vote on the build-dev list gives no indication of disagreement between Members. A potential voice of disagreement was Erik Trimble post [1], but he seems to be asking whether he can vote NO. Per the interim rules, as he is not listed among the build group's members[2], he can not vote without the group voting him in as a member first. As an item of process curiosity, though: You are a member of the build group, and haven't cast a vote, so you could try to argue that your vote window still extends until the end of the two week period started by Kelly's call for votes on the 7th. ;) I think we can agree that a vote can be counted out by a groups's moderator before all members have voted, provided that the majority is irreversibly reached for or against the issue being voted on, as it was in this case. That would prevent decisions from being delayed due to Members whose votes couldn't influence a decision any more being absent from the vote. Does that make sense to others? [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000663.html [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2008-January/000659.html From mr at sun.com Tue Jan 22 21:25:29 2008 From: mr at sun.com (Mark Reinhold) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:25:29 -0800 Subject: Delayed sponsorship vote on the JDK 6 Project Proposal In-Reply-To: mr@sun.com; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:39:38 PST; <20080116233938.6FAD8278A19@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: <20080123052529.5437274FA@callebaut.niobe.net> > From: Mark Reinhold > To: gb-discuss at openjdk.java.net > ... > > Rather than ask Joe to resubmit the JDK 6 Project Proposal, I hereby > request the Interim Governance Board to recognize the Build Group's > sponsorship vote as valid despite its tardiness. > > GB members: Please indicate your agreement (or not) in replies to this > message. Thank you for your prompt votes. I also vote: yes. For the record, the GB has now voted unanimously in favor of recognizing the Build Group's delayed sponsorship vote of the JDK 6 Project. - Mark