Glynn Foster wrote:
> Hey,
>
> John Plocher wrote:
>> Glynn Foster wrote:
>>> FWIW, I'd *strongly* advocate that any membership is pro-active.
>> In the link I included I suggested:
>>
>> The use case for joining a community becomes:
>> o create an account on opensolaris.org
>> o go to a community's web page
>> o click on "become an observer".
>>
>> This makes you a Community Member.
>
> I'd actually totally agree with this if there wasn't already a constitution
> already written - you might want to re-read section 3.
OK - so maybe we have
J Random Public: Can browse the web fora and content, can't contribute.
Contributer: Gets a OS.o account, can "observe" communities and projects,
can post to fora/mail lists, can't access hg or vote
Core: Gets hg commit access and ability to vote.
I can live with this as well, though in my experience there is a desired
distinction between "likes to hear themselves talk on a public alias" and
"wants to contribute something tangible"; both are distinct from "is a
core developer".
Maybe we need a simple constitutional update to provide for 4 classes
of "membership":
Public: Read/Only, no special privs/access
Observer: Has OS.o account, can post messages, glom on as observer
Contributer Same abilities as Observer, but acknowledged by the core
participants for contributing something they value.
Core Decision makers (vote) with commit hg access
-John
