[Foundation] Retraction: Call for Arbitration addition to the by-laws

Peter Saint-Andre stpeter at jabber.org
Tue Jul 1 23:16:06 CDT 2003

On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 06:06:11PM -0700, Justin Karneges wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 July 2003 05:18 pm, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> > >>>>> "RE" == Ryan Eatmon <reatmon at jabber.org> writes:
> >
> >     RE> Are there any objections to this proposal being added to JEP
> >     RE> #1 and being made part of the JEP process?
> >
> > What, is that all it takes?
> >
> > I don't object, I'm just a little shocked that things come and go like
> > that.
> >
> > ~ESP
> I think we still need the 5% seconds for it to happen, he was just making sure 
> no one minded moving the changes into JEP 1 instead of the by-laws.

I am the author of JEP-0001. The Board has given me authority to 
make appropriate, uncontroversial changes to JEP-0001 as necessary 
to incorporate lessons learned. There is no requirement that any
change to JEP-0001 needs to be approved by any percentage of the 
members. JEPs are under the purview of the Council, not the members.
The members elect the Council (and secondarily the Board) to oversee 
the JEP process.

That said, I would never make a change to JEP-0001 that does not have
broad consensus among the membership. However, there is no requirement
for the members to approve changes to the JEP process. At this point, 
most such changes address edge cases and deficiencies we didn't think
of early on.

And things come and go because I'm awfully awfully busy and didn't take
the time to read Ryan's proposal carefully enough when he showed it to me
earlier today.

Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.


More information about the Members mailing list