On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Jim Grisanzio wrote: > On 04/23/09 06:49, Shawn Walker wrote: >> I think CGs need to realise that they can use the "Contributor" role to >> recognise individuals that have contributed, but that "Core Contributor" >> should be reserved for those that have an active desired to be involved in >> CG Governance and governance of the entire community. > That's really the best way to look at it. And that's implied in section 3.1 > but it should be stated explicitly in 3.3 since that section outlines the > four roles. Some people point to 3.3 and say the distinction between C and CC > is not that great, and they are correct if they read that section only. The > big distinction comes when you back up to 3.1, and there you read that CCs > are Members (which is not listed as a role) and they are the people who vote > across the entire community.
That's my hope with this policy, is it will give us an opportunity to explain what is not necessarily very clear in the constitution before handing out the grant. I hope this will help with voter apathy :) >> Either that, or we may need to (in the long-term) separate the governance >> aspects of the individuals CGs and the > I agree. Overall, I find that many people want to be CCs because that role is > implied to be the top level. I disagree with that implication. I'd much > rather we separate governance from development as much as possible as you > suggest (which was attempted in the new constitution by reducing roles and > centralizing the Membership process with the OGB). That way people can focus > on what they feel is most important for their own interests. Some will focus > narrowly on a given project, while others will focus more broadly across the > entire community. To me those two are simply different. One is not more > important than the other. This is one thing I think the new constitution did a very good job of separating out, and I hope that by implementing this policy, we can keep the core contributors limited to those interested in governance until the new constitution can pass (and I hope those that are interested will provide their feedback when the review time comes, which will be the biggest factor in getting acceptance). Valerie -- Valerie Fenwick, http://blogs.sun.com/bubbva Solaris Security Technologies, Developer, Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, Menlo Park, CA, 94025.
