hey ...

Peter Tribble wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Alan Burlison <Alan.Burlison at sun.com> 
> wrote:
>   
>> Deirdre Straughan wrote:
>>     
>>> FYI, these are the types of collectives and their available
>>> "relationships" currently available to me in auth:
>>>
>>>   * community group - participant, affiliate, leader
>>>   * electorate - contributor, core contributor, facilitator
>>>   * project - participant, developer, leader
>>>   * user group - participant, affiliate, leader
>>>       


Yes, you have access to those Collectives in Auth, but as OGB Secretary 
you only manage the governance roles in each CG Electorate. It's 
impossible to add governance roles to any other Collective.


>>> So when you say you want CC grants to go to persons x,y, and z, does that
>>> mean you want them to be leaders of the related community group, project, or
>>> user group? 

Leader is not a governance role, and Projects and User Groups are not 
involved in governance. As per the Constitution, Community Group's drive 
governance and people with governance roles are stored in each CG's 
associated Electorate. So, in Auth, when you add a user to any given CG 
Electorate, you only have a choice of giving them a governance role.

I explained this a few months ago. I'm happy to talk again (next week is 
fine) and walk you through it. It's not difficult and, unlike the old 
system, Auth lets you update these grants very rapidly. Shouldn't be a 
problem at all, especially since there aren't that many grants to do.


>>> Yes, confusion!
>>>       


All the Collectives and all the Roles and all the Privileges associated 
with each Role on the Website *and* in Governance are documented here:

http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Main/site-roles-collectives

I keep pointing to that document because it's the only document that 
outlines the structure of the community and everyone's role within the 
community. The Constitution doesn't.


>> "CC" = "core contributor", "C" = "contributor".  The only things you should
>> be adding is "contributor" and "core contributor" to "electorate".  If
>> you've made entries elsewhere, they are incorrect and should be removed.
>>     
> With one caveat - when a community group is first created, or revitalized
> (which was the case for some of these) 


Which CGs?


> it makes sense to set (or reset)
> the initial set of leaders to be the Core Contributors, 


No, I can't do that when I set up a new CG. Just because someone is 
Leader doesn't make them a CC. CC is a governance role and the OGB 
Secretary is responsible for managing governance roles -- and that's at 
the direct request of the OGB. So, when I set up a new CG, I'll add 
Leaders to the CG Auth. Then the OGB Secretary adds Contributors, Core 
Contributors, and Facilitator to the CG's Electorate. I outlined that in 
the Infrastructure Life Cycle document after the OGB specified that only 
the OGB Secretary manages governance roles:

http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Main/site-infrastructure-lifecycles

Now, it's certainly true that as a practical matter the initial Leaders 
I add to Auth are, in fact, also CCs due to how the Constitution 
specifies the creation of CGs. But that's irrelevant to me when I set up 
a new CG. I can only make someone a Leader, not a CC. That's what the 
OGB wanted.


> so that there is
> a set of leaders - we have to make sure that there's at least one active
> leader in each group at all times. 


I have to add at least one Leader to each Collective I create or else no 
one can edit the Collective's pages. If lists are requested, I also make 
those Leaders admins on the lists and I subscribe them to the lists as 
well. Every Collective that I create starts that way.


> But updating CC grants for an active
> community shouldn't change the leaders or anything else - 


Correct.


> the current
> leaders ought to be on top of that situation.
>   


That's not necessarily true. The CG Facilitator should be on top of 
governance issues, as per the Constitution since the OGB appoints the 
Facilitators, but not all Leaders need concern themselves with it. 
Leaders can function just fine in this community with no role in 
governance whatsoever.

Jim




Reply via email to