On 03/06/09 10:47, Michelle Olson wrote:
> Jim Grisanzio wrote:
>> John Beck wrote:
>>> Jim> I'd like to suggest to the OGB that we allow these 4 grants in 
>>> because
>>> Jim> they had been in the queue but were delayed due to the bug in 
>>> poll and
>>> Jim> we also need to consider that the website has had very serious 
>>> issues
>>> Jim> the last week and a half (in fact, we've never had website 
>>> issues as bad
>>> Jim> as this) which has stressed everything. In other words, since 
>>> the OGB
>>> Jim> decided to not stick to the original deadline due to the poll 
>>> bug, now
>>> Jim> things are backed up and exacerbated even further by the 
>>> infrastructure
>>> Jim> problems with the site. I'm not saying we should let in /new/ 
>>> grants, but
>>> Jim> I think we should finalize the grants that were already in the 
>>> queue.
>>>
>>> Simon> It's plausibly against the current Constitution, so it 
>>> depends on how
>>> Simon> people feel about it. Personally I would say that since the 
>>> process
>>> Simon> was all followed and they are simply missing from the electronic
>>> Simon> representation of the list and not from the OGB's communications
>>> Simon> traffic they could be added in.
>>>
>>> Yes, I thought we all agreed that grant extensions, especially those 
>>> caused
>>> by the bug in the database and those where the Right Thing had 
>>> happened on
>>> time but the update was delayed, be allowed.  At any rate, I am OK 
>>> with this.
>>>   
>>
>> Can we finalize this?
>>
>> Jim
> Hi Jim,
>
> I'm working on it, will get these added today.

Ok, advocacy core contributor grants have been added for the 4 that I 
missed last week, lasarux, mmca13, hecsa, xapiens, and also alhopper 
which failed last week due to a separate bug.


Thanks for your patience,
Michelle
>
> -M
> _______________________________________________
> ogb-discuss mailing list
> ogb-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss


Reply via email to