JDK Updates Maintainer process

[Andrew Haley]

On 1/31/19 10:04 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:

> I just wonder why the Project Lead alone selects the new Lead
> Maintainer from the list of candidates who have nominated themselves
> and the Project's Committers and Reviewers can only ratify the Project
> Lead's selection? From my point of view, this process is not very
> "democratic" and give the Project Lead too much power compared to the
> Project's Committers and Reviewers. Wouldn't it be more transparent if
> the Committers and Reviewers could directly elect the new Lead
> Maintainer from the list of candidates (in the same way how At-Large
> Members are voted into the Governing Board [3]).

It would be more democratic, but it wouldn't necessarily be better.

The question of whether open source projects should be organized on a
"one person, one vote" basis is complex and has a much wider scope
than simply this one issue. If it is a matter of a simple election
(conducted by what system? FPTP, AV, the list goes on) there is the
risk of a hostile takeover if one faction enters a project. This isn't
something that we'll be able to solve in a thread on this list.
However, there will be plenty of opportunity to discuss this and
similar issues in Brussels this weekend.

-- 
Andrew Haley
Java Platform Lead Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671