-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I don't like that. I don't like that fact that from > the start, those who are approved as initial committers > aren't on the PPMC.
Fact, or would-be fact according to the proposal? > If that means we need to trim the > size of the initial pool of committers in the proposal, > then I'm all for that. But restricting initial PPMC membership > just to Mentors when those people who are the initial > committers have (one hopes) already the long association > with the code and the community aren't included in > just seems wrong, and getting the podling off to > the wrong start. +1. It sounds to me like a case of 'whoops, we let this slip by; we didn't look at that portion of the proposal as closely as we should have, so let's rectify that now.' (No insult intended to anyone.) Short-term solution? Live by the unwritten social contract: that the 'initial committers' in the accepted proposal *are* the initial committers for the podling. Long-term solution? Pay more attention to that part of the proposal in the future. - -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBRSQyXJrNPMCpn3XdAQLS2QQAj7cdiPcTF6dT9fRi9ugIT8Ecma93wJWA y5Vc27RqKxLOw2yNUPAb2+UDjX1eqci2WSeURe7pZZooBTd+DsUtGftaI8nMbh6b 59u4NLdh4XVHcxwS37vrZ8oyxKBAs2Ba789IhVqne70rZj2yz2ENRYqx+DrPloE9 RQdRXYEqHrA= =BduE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
