What I'm saying is, Bylaw 5 is still in effect, but is now unfair, due to the move to GitHub. I think we should either have a PMC vote before this election to revise Bylaw 5, or simply ignore it.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:59 AM Scoop Gracie <scoopgra...@gmail.com> wrote: > At least to me, it seems unfair that some contributors should be excluded. > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:57 AM Scoop Gracie <scoopgra...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Because now, many contributions come through pull requests. Those >> definitions exclude any contributors who do not have write access, even if >> they have contributed significantly to Apertium. >> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:55 AM Mikel L. Forcada <m...@dlsi.ua.es> wrote: >> >>> Why is it SF-related? It talks about the project's source repositories, >>> without reference to SF. >>> >>> Mikel >>> >>> El 26/2/20 a les 17:49, Scoop Gracie ha escrit: >>> > That is an outdated, SF-based definition. Shouldn't developers who >>> > have submitted PRs be equally eligible? >>> >>> -- >>> Mikel L. Forcada http://www.dlsi.ua.es/~mlf/ >>> Departament de Llenguatges i Sistemes Informàtics >>> Universitat d'Alacant >>> E-03690 Sant Vicent del Raspeig >>> Spain >>> Office: +34 96 590 9776 >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Apertium-stuff mailing list >>> Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff >>> >>
_______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
