Simon Phipps wrote:
> Thanks, Jim, good summary. I'd agree with giving community-wide
> governance-only voting rights to anyone who has a demonstrable history
> of contribution, on request by that person or with the confirmation of
> that person to the request of another. Should we call those people
> "members" and decouple the status from rank in the various community
> groups?
I would say that being designated a core contributor to a community
group should be considered a demonstrable history of contribution,
such that any core contributor could ask to become a voting member
of the community-at-large, but that it should be by request, not
automatic. We know many engineers want a vote in matters in their
area, but don't want to participate in community governance, and
struggling to get quorum for voting on amendments and such because
they don't vote.
I also wouldn't require being a core contributor of some community
to get a community wide vote - it would just be one way of proving
your contribution level.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
