Ghee Teo wrote: >> 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? This is why I dislike the terminology... I completely agree that they should be recognised for their technical work and accomplishments - but if they aren't interested in setting community direction and voting, then they shouldn't have to feel that they should vote.
Right now "Core Contributor" sounds better and more "core" than just "Contributor", which is unfortunate. If we took these roles and mapped them to an analog set of roles in American government, it would be: Regular American & Regular American Who Registered To Vote These aren't that different, and the people who have taken the time to register to vote have exercised their desire to influence and change things politically. Does this diminish the role of everyone else? Not at all. Maybe if we renamed them to be: Regular American and Core American We'd get more people to vote in national elections ;-) > >> 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. Very true. >> 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. Nobody ever wants the right to vote until their rights are being impinged on. :) Conversely, if you are in "happy coding away mode", and you *are* a Core Contributor, should you not be expected to vote in every thing that comes up? What if it doesn't impact your own personal "happy coding away mode"? The role of a "Core Contributor" should be to look out for more than just things that impinge on their own rights. > 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] Not at all - I'm not trying to get people to re-think their role requests solely because of proportions (heck, I think given how well the Desktop Community is run - having more Desktop Core Contributors influencing the larger OpenSolaris Community is a great thing). > 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? I do. But I want people to be aware of what they are signing up for, and that there are responsibilities as well as rights - and that they shouldn't just take the rights without the responsibilities. cheers, steve -- stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net
