Ed, good questions re. governance.
The members were originally published to the mailing list, but we have been remiss in publishing on the website. As Bill noted, we’re working on it and hopefully can get it done soon.
Re. the role of an alternate - the role is not formally specified in the charter or bylaws, but instead is a convention we use in working groups (and at the Board level) that enables better continuity for committees.
The convention has been that enabling the alternate (or alternates) to be on the mailing lists and attend calls "as an observer" is useful, since a Strategic member representative may have a fellow employee represent them as an alternate at any committee meeting, and to vote on their behalf. An alternate could also vote on behalf of the representative for an electronic vote, but the alternate would need to make it clear they are voting on behalf of their representative/company.
In the specific case of commit access, my contention would be that alternates do not get commit access. It is harder to administer, and more difficult to track an action to a specific representative. Also, it would seem that another committee member could perform any commits required. Certainly from a record keeping point of view, having only committers have write access is much simpler as we can equate write access to committee membership.
As a reminder, our records show following individuals are currently Spec committee members.
Kenji Kazumura - Fujitsu, Michael DeNicola - alternate Dan Bandera - IBM, Kevin Sutter - alternate Bill Shannon - Oracle, Ed Bratt - alternate Steve Millidge - Payara, Arjan Tijms - alternate Scott Stark - Red Hat, Mark Little - alternate David Blevins - Tomitribe, Richard Monson-Haefel - alternate Ivar Grimstad - PMC Representative Alex Theedom - London Java Community Elected Participant Representative Werner Keil - Elected Committer Representative Paul Buck - Eclipse Foundation (serves as interim chair, but is not a committee member)
Hope this helps. Paul
Paul White VP, Member Services | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.
+1.613.852.4303 (mobile)
I asked the meta-question recently of where is the membership for all our committees documented. I believe the Eclipse folks agreed that it should be documented on the jakarta.ee web site, but I don't know their schedule for doing so. I don't have a strong opinion about alternates having commit rights, but note that alternates can always submit a PR that can be committed by someone else. Ed Bratt wrote on 7/17/19 12:39 PM: From what I can tell (and this is all just inferential), the jakarta.ee/specifications repository was set up and I think that all those who are listed as primary representatives of their organizations were given commit access. I have a couple of questions:
Where is the membership of this committee documented? Is it just the list at the top of each meeting agenda?
Should the folks who have been designated as alternates also have commit access? Is there an actual 'alternate' role, or is this just an informal designation? As an example, if some action were required and the primary representative were on vacation, or otherwise unable to participate, I'd have thought that the alternate would be empowered to act on behalf of the primary person, but I'm not at all sure. Maybe this is all covered in some bylaws someplace?
Thanks,
-- Ed
_______________________________________________ jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee
_______________________________________________ jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxxTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee
|