Hi Stephen,

  Knowing your approach, always gentle ...

Stephen Lau wrote:
> snap...
>
> This is going to sound more negative than I mean, but don't ask for core 
> contributor status just because you feel like it, or even because you 
> believe or deserve it.  I've said it before, and I'll re-iterate it 
> here: core contributors and contributors should really only differ in 
> voting rights and responsibilities.
>   
  Voting rights is a privilege and come with it the responsibilities. I 
agree here :).
> I say both rights & responsibilities because being a core contributor 
> means you are making a commitment to be involved and participate 
> *actively* in THIS Desktop Community.  Which means staying afloat and 
> current on everything that's going on, weighing in on community 
> decisions, and in general playing a really active role in the 
> community.  
  This is only one specific aspect of the community, not everyone is 
interested [1]
But if a Core Contributor is not doing this but hacking away on many 
technical
area and wanted to be a Core Contributor, why should s/he be rejected?

> If you intend to do this, then awesome - that totally 
> warrants you asking for core contributor status.
>
> If you are like me, and perhaps just lazy and want the recognition 
> without any of the responsibilities (and take it from an OGB member, the 
> responsibilities start to weigh you down after a while), 
  Being in OGB is a different league as of the Desktop Core Contributor. 
Let not
confuse your feelings/emotion :). OGB is representative for the whole of the
OpenSolaris, Desktop is only part of. OGB is the Core of the cores in 
really.
OGB makes decisions impact the whole of OpenSolaris, whereas Desktop is more
so trying to strife and flourish within the overall confines of the 
OpenSolaris charters.
But the rights to vote is important, see blow.
> or *want* to be 
> involved but can't make the commitment to stay up to date and be active 
> constantly -- then stick with contributor.  It's easier.  It's less 
> stress.  It means you can just hack, and code in peace while peacefully 
> ignoring the flames and mess that can arise with passionate, diverse, 
> and involved communities.
   While this may be true for most of the time, but what if the Core 
Contributors of
the Desktop community is making some proposal which would impact your happy
coding away mode, you have *NO* right to vote on it.
  It is with this same line of rationales, I encourage openly or 
privately all of the
Desktop communities to go for Core Contributor status so that we have the
opportunities to exercise the rights given the responsibilities of 
contributing to
the works. In particularly, we want to have sufficient representative 
say in the
voting of the greater OpenSolaris  issues, such as OGB member etc.

  Currently, we have 10 Core Contributors from the Desktop communities
in the total of 325 Core Contributors, are we been proportional represented?
[Bearing in mind, the total number of Core Contributors will increase not
sure by how much]

  Do we not think we should 'reserve' the rights to vote if we have been
given responsibility to 'contribute' in the communities we work in?


-Ghee

[1]  This aspect of the community should best be served by a small group of
people in the community who want to involve in such capacity, possibly a
self nominated committee. Currently, we have this in the form of 
contribution
to this mailing list.

> cheers,
> steve
>
> p.s. don't take this to be a negative message; I think it's incredible 
> that this many people are looking to get involved in (IMHO) one of the 
> most sane and well-run communities on opensolaris.org... I just want to 
> make sure people are aware of all the responsibilities they are signing 
> up for as well as the rights.
>
> Glynn Foster wrote:
>   
>> Hey,
>>
>> So with the elections looming, it seems like now's a good time to get the 
>> grants
>> fixed up for the Desktop Community.
>>
>> While I did have some plans to put into place Brian and Ghee's proposal of
>> having a membership form, I've unfortunately not had time to do so. What I 
>> think
>> we should do is that anyone who feels they should have a grant (either
>> contributor or core contributor) should shout out, and we'll compile a list 
>> of
>> names and get the current core contributors to vote on them. While only core
>> contributors get to vote in the election, seems like a good time to update 
>> the
>> contributor grants too.
>>
>> As a reminder, here's the current grants -
>>
>> Core Contributors
>> Brian Cameron
>> Damien Carbery
>> Darren Kenny
>> Dermot McCluskey
>> Doug Scott
>> Erwann Ch?ned?
>> Glynn Foster
>> Jian-Hua Lin
>> Laszlo (Laca) Peter
>> Padraig O'Briain
>>
>> Contributor
>> Albert Lee
>> Calum Benson
>> Doug Scott
>> Eric Boutilier
>> Ghee Teo
>> Justin Conover
>> Ken Mays
>> Stefan Teleman
>>
>> Shout out now! :)
>>
>>
>> Glynn
>> _______________________________________________
>> desktop-discuss mailing list
>> desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org
>>   
>>     
>
>
>   


Reply via email to