On 24 Jan 2008, at 16:50, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Alvaro Lopez Ortega wrote: >> .. and you know what? I'm wondering whether these high bureaucracy >> community mechanisms that we have come up with are something >> beneficial.. or even needed. >> >> We are doing F/OSS. This is a F/OSS community.. and after ten years >> working in this sort of communities, this is the first time that I >> see >> something similar. > > Really? It seems to me quite a bit like the process the GNOME > Foundation & X.Org Foundations use to grant membership to people, > giving them the right to vote in the elections for their respective > Boards.
Good point! However, I don't think it is quite the same. In this case, we were discussing how the rules were going to be applied after a big number of people applied of (core) contributor status - mainly from the whole JDS team. My doubts about these community mechanisms are based on the fact of the OSOL community being a different kind of community like, for instance, GNOME. We may be adopting processing that we simple do not need, and that will be - let's say - inefficient even if those processes work great of other projects. For example: should a developer/QA engineer in the JDS team have the core contributor status? Well, given that is a person who is spending at least 8 hour a day working on the OSOL desktop, I would say that it is, without having to apply any kind a rule or voting. Of course, I am not saying that the current mechanism/rules is a bad thing - I do not think it is. I am just trying to convince myself that it is something that we really need as it is implemented today. -- Greetings, alo.
