On Aug 25, 2008, at 23:04, Alan Burlison wrote: > Simon Phipps wrote: > >>>> 3. List the OpenSolaris entity(s) in which you contribute >>> Isn't that just the same as the list of collectives for which you >>> have contributor status? >> No. You may not consider that your contribution is sufficient to >> justify Electorate Member status. Our benchmark is "substantially >> contributed". Offering a set of check boxes would be cool though. > > But can we assume that as a minimum you'd have to achieved > contributor status?
Yes, exactly. >>>> 4. For each entity, identify the Solaris user ID of the >>>> Leader who can verify your claim. >>> Isn't that just the same as the list of leaders of the >>> aforementioned collectives? >> No. People will want to identify a leader that knows them and can >> vouch for them. And I think it's too much of an overhead to expect >> every Leader to vote. I'd suggest offering radio buttons for each >> leader of each collective whose check box was checked above, so >> they can select one for each. > > That would be possible. We'd also have to notify the leaders they > needed to vouch for people - perhaps via email, with a 'click here > to vouch' token in the body of the mail? Yes, that would work perfectly. There would also need to be a "use these existing Members instead" radio button and pair of validated fields. > Just so nobody gets too excited - I'm not making any sort of firm > commitment to do this, although I think it's a reasonable idea - > there are more pressing things we need to address first. It does > seem however that the natural place for it would be the membership > system, as a 'phase two' extension. Indeed, I assume that we would need a manual process that embodied the same principles if you were not able to implement a custom system. S.
