On 12/09/2009 04:44 PM, Robert Godfrey wrote:
2009/12/9 Gordon Sim<g...@redhat.com>
On 12/09/2009 03:06 PM, Gordon Sim wrote:
On 12/08/2009 07:34 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote:
As there have been no comments or questions on the discussion thread,
I'm going to move this to a vote:
Sorry for jumping in late here, I was away on holiday when the mail was
first sent.
Qualities we look for:
- A candidate must demonstrate an understanding of how our project
is structured and how we work.
Could we make this a bit more concrete/specific?
For me the key to how we work is a collaborative, consensus based
approach to development.
What is meant by project structure here? A knowledge of the different
components and how they are intended to work as a whole? Or an
appreciation of the individuals that work on particular areas (i.e. the
team structure)? Or something else?
Just to be clear, I am not opposing the vote here. I'm just suggesting that
by spelling out "how our project is structured and how we work" we cold make
the list of qualities more precise.
Defining how we work and how our project is structured is probably a
separate document and a separate vote... I think some of the other threads
recently have been moving us forward on those points, and I would like to
see that work completed as soon as possible. It doesn't seem to me,
however, to be a barrier to voting in the Committership Criteria that we
have not yet formally defined these, since we may anyway change our
structure and practice over time.
Yes, that is fine by me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscr...@qpid.apache.org
