On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:27 PM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip> > That would make the PPMC be about 50% IBM day job and 50% (non IBMers or > IBM non-day jobers). Can we take it to a private list if anyone wants a > detailed breakdown? +1 IMO the IPMC is wrong to ask for named affiliations in public. contractual information is potentially confidential and should be discussed only in private. all that should be needed in public are aggregate statistics. IMHO the emphasis on committer affiliation is misguided. overloading the word diversity was also probably a mistake. maybe we need to focus on narrower concepts with alternative names. 1. the incubator should be concerned about the composition of the proposed PMC. PMC conveys voting rights and control of the project going forward. independent committers are fine but if these are not being enfranchised then this should be a concern. so the aggregation distribution of affiliations of PPMC members should be of interest. i don't care what the affliation is, just the aggregate stats. 2. for a top level project to succeed, it needs to be able to encrourage, recruit and mentor new independent developers. unless a project demonstrates the ability to recruit new independent developers, it is not ready to graduate. so, i would like to know how many new independent committers the project has developed, am interested in the quantity of code they've contributed and whether they are on the PPMC. again, i don't care about their affiliations. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
