An important to thing to consider when considering "Core Contributor
Grants" is that they confer voting privileges. Apart from that
distinction, there is no difference between Contributors and Core
Contributors.
I've been considering putting forth a set of proposed amendments to the
constitution which would have an impact on the way representation works.
One idea is to split the powers between "houses". Imagine that you had
an "upper house" of Core Contributors, made of up at most 3 persons per
community (and no one person could be a CC for more than one community),
and a "lower house" made of up all Contributors.
Then you could have election rules like:
1) OGB is elected by popular election from all Contributors.
2) Core Contributors for a CG are elected by the Contributors from that CG.
3) Constitutional Amendments must be passed by both "houses"
4) Other community-wide matters requiring a vote (I can't think of any,
but imagine if the OGB requested an action be passed by the membership)
are handled by the Core Contributors.
Just thinking out loud here... but right now the way CC grants versus C
grants are given out is far too inconsistent from one CG to another.
-- Garrett
Brian Cameron wrote:
> Brian:
>
>
>>> I would, for example, expect the list of Core Contributors to have
>>> some relation to the senior engineers in the JDS team, for example.
>>> It probably doesn't make so much sense for a junior programmer who
>>> has just started working for Sun last month to be considered a "core
>>> contributor" just because they work on the JDS team.
>>>
>>>
>> I don't agree. Sun's internal engineering hierarchy should have nothing
>> to do with OpenSolaris "Contributor" or "Core Contributor" hierarchy.
>>
>
> I didn't intend to say that Sun's engineering hierarchy and OpenSolaris
> core-contributor should have a 1-1 mapping. That said, I disagree that
> one's position within Sun should have "nothing" to do with being an
> OpenSolaris contributor.
>
> What I was trying to say is that the qualifications that make a person
> a senior engineer (such as having experience working across organizational
> boundries) are the sort of things that would qualify someone for being
> a core contributor. This doesn't mean that a junior programmer couldn't
> also have these skills or be a core contributor.
>
> I would think it odd, for example, if the OpenSolaris core contributors
> list were only made up of interns and junior programmers while the
> list of "contributors" were full of senior engineers. Wouldn't that
> seem odd to you? So there *is* some relation.
>
> Brian
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-discuss mailing list
> desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org
>
