Brian Nitz wrote: > Doug Scott wrote: >> Ghee Teo wrote: >> >>> Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote: >>> >>>> Ladies and gentlemen, >>>> >>>> Desktop is probably the only community that has Contributor >>>> guidelines[1] so may I suggest that we follow them (apart from >>>> the fill in the form part, since the form is not there yet). >>>> >>> So the proposed guidelines have been accepted by the communities? >>> How, and by whom, through what process? >>> I still asking this as I think it is important to clarify (even >>> though I am >>> one of the author of the guidelines). >>> >> As a core contributor, they look sane enough guidelines for me to >> use. Other core contributors may have a different opinion and they >> can vote accordingly. They are only guidelines at the end of they day. >> > I suspect most existing "core contributors" didn't pass through > "contributor" status as guideline 1 recommends. In the interest of > fairness existing contributors and core contributors should eventually > be evaluated under the same guidelines as newcomers, but since most > existing core contributors should easily qualify for past and > continuing efforts, this is a formality we can probably ignore for a > while. Most of the existing desktop grants were given out when OpenSolaris.Org first started. The initial grants were really to have a voting membership.
> Though I would hope anyone who no longer actively contributing will do > the honorable thing and volunteer to go to "emeritus contributor" status. They can if they wish or wait for the expiration of their grant. > > Of of my primary goals in helping establish these guidelines was to > emphasize that "core contributor" and "contributor" status shouldn't > be seen primarily as a path to community rights (e.g. the right to > vote), but as a promise to contribute in the future. It is up to each of the core contributors to decide whether they use the guidelines or not. I think the promise should be to contribute and participate in the community via the mailing list as Section 7.10 makes it reasonably clear that the business of the community is done either by the mailing lists or a similar mechanism. >>>> These are the Core Contributor criteria according to the >>>> Guidelines: >>>> >>>> Core Contributor Criteria >>>> >>>> 1. Already granted Contributor status. >>>> 2. Significant non-trivial contributions have been made >>>> in the respective area of expertise. >>>> 3. Desire for in-depth involvement in the Desktop community >>>> in the Open Source context. (evidence or trend to show such >>>> level of involvement). >>>> 4. Actively involved in decision making that impact the >>>> direction and formulation of the Desktop community [*] >>>> 5. Two References to back up applications >>>> >>>> In particular, I'd like to draw the attention to 1. and >>>> suggest that requests for Core Contributor status from >>>> non-Contributors should be treated as requests for >>>> Contributor status. >>>> >>>> Also note 3. I personally think that even Contributors >>>> should be only those who are active in the OpenSolaris community >>>> and not just "doing their job at Sun", >>> A contributor is anyone who contributes to the Desktop, should >>> not be excluded because they are "doing their job at Sun". >> If they only work for Sun (or anybody else) and have no community >> involvement, then why should they be included? Just because they work >> for Sun? >> > They shouldn't. The point is that in real life there is a huge amount > of overlap. Those currently on the "Core Contributor" list with > *.sun.com probably don't make all of their contributions during their > lunch break. Likewise, anyone working on OpenSource projects within > Sun are necessarily working on both sides of the firewall. Think of > it this way, I don't think many RedHat, SuSE/Novel software engineers > would say "I don't contribute to GNU/Linux", even though relatively > few of them have commit access to kernel.org. "Non-public discussion related to the Community Group, such as in-person meetings or private communication, shall not be considered part of the Community Group activities unless or until a record of such discussion is made available via the normal meeting mechanism." I think this section of the constitution draws the line of what is *.sun.com contributions, Gnome.Org and OpenSolaris.Org contributions. To me communication on this mailing list is a requirement not an option for an active contributor. Doug
