1.. _rfc-1:
2
3==============================================
4RFC 1: Project Management Committee Guidelines
5==============================================
6
7Author: Frank Warmerdam
8
9Contact: warmerdam@pobox.com
10
11Status: Adopted
12
13Summary
14-------
15
16This document describes how the GDAL/OGR Project Management Committee
17determines membership, and makes decisions on GDAL/OGR project issues.
18
19In brief the committee votes on proposals on gdal-dev. Proposals are
20available for review for at least two days, and a single veto is
21sufficient to delay progress though ultimately a majority of members can
22pass a proposal.
23
24Detailed Process
25----------------
26
271.  Proposals are written up and submitted on the gdal-dev mailing list
28    for discussion and voting, by any interested party, not just
29    committee members.
302.  Proposals need to be available for review for at least two business
31    days before a final decision can be made.
323.  Respondents may vote "+1" to indicate support for the proposal and a
33    willingness to support implementation.
344.  Respondents may vote "-1" to veto a proposal, but must provide clear
35    reasoning and alternate approaches to resolving the problem within
36    the two days.
375.  A vote of -0 indicates mild disagreement, but has no effect. A 0
38    indicates no opinion. A +0 indicate mild support, but has no effect.
396.  Anyone may comment on proposals on the list, but only members of the
40    Project Management Committee's votes will be counted.
417.  A proposal will be accepted if it receives +2 (including the
42    proposer) and no vetos (-1).
438.  If a proposal is vetoed, and it cannot be revised to satisfy all
44    parties, then it can be resubmitted for an override vote in which a
45    majority of all eligible voters indicating +1 is sufficient to pass
46    it. Note that this is a majority of all committee members, not just
47    those who actively vote.
489.  Upon completion of discussion and voting the proposer should
49    announce whether they are proceeding (proposal accepted) or are
50    withdrawing their proposal (vetoed).
5110. The Chair gets a vote.
5211. The Chair is responsible for keeping track of who is a member of the
53    Project Management Committee.
5412. Addition and removal of members from the committee, as well as
55    selection of a Chair should be handled as a proposal to the
56    committee. The selection of a new Chair also requires approval of
57    the OSGeo board.
5813. The Chair adjudicates in cases of disputes about voting.
59
60When is Vote Required?
61----------------------
62
63-  Anything that could cause backward compatibility issues.
64-  Adding substantial amounts of new code.
65-  Changing inter-subsystem APIs, or objects.
66-  Issues of procedure.
67-  When releases should take place.
68-  Anything that might be controversial.
69
70Observations
71------------
72
73-  The Chair is the ultimate adjudicator if things break down.
74-  The absolute majority rule can be used to override an obstructionist
75   veto, but it is intended that in normal circumstances vetoers need to
76   be convinced to withdraw their veto. We are trying to reach
77   consensus.
78
79Bootstrapping
80-------------
81
82Frank Warmerdam is declared initial Chair of the Project Management
83Committee.
84
85Daniel Morissette, Frank Warmerdam, Andrey Kiselev and Howard Butler are
86declared to be the founding Project Management Committee. The current
87membership list can be found on the :ref:`psc` page.
88