Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> Following on the discussion from this week's call and previous
> mail about what to do with the Community Groups without Core
> Contributors.
>
> The Constitution gives us a couple of choices:
>
> 7.12. Termination. A Community Group is terminated by act of the OGB
> or by reduction of its named Core Contributors to a number less
> than three (3). Upon termination, the OGB may re-initiate the
> Community Group with a new set of Core Contributors or reassign
> the resources that were assigned to the Community Group, such as
> mailing lists, forums, and website information, to the at-large
> community or to some other Community Group of the OGB's choosing.
>
> [So while my use of "defunct" to describe them may have annoyed some,
> the constitutionally correct use of "Terminated Community" would
> probably have been even worse. 8-) ]
>
> By my counts during the election (and assuming none have named more
> contributors since), these are the groups that don't have enough
> core contributors:
>
> Appliances 0
> Approachability 1
> Chinese Users 0
> Databases 0
> Device Drivers 0
> GNU Solaris 0
> Games 0
> HPC Developer 0
> Immigrants 2
> Observability 0
> Printing 0
> Volume Manager 0
> Storage 0
> Systems Administrators 0
> Unix File Systems (UFS) 0
>
> Steve's proposal for re-organization already covers some of these:
>
> - 'Chinese Users' renamed to the 'China Portal' project and
> endorsed by 'Internationalization & Localization'
> - 'GNU Solaris' made into a project endorsed by Freeware
> - Performance & Observability communities merge under
> a unified 'Performance & Observability' community
> - 'Solaris Volume Manager' renamed to 'Volume Manager' and
> made a project endorsed by Storage
> - UFS, ZFS, & NFS made into projects endorsed by Filesystems
>
> Ben has suggested merging Immigrants into the new Advocacy community
> formed from the User Groups & Marketing merger.
>
> Since those communities are officially dead, voting on their disposition
> is left to the OGB once we have finished the discussion on them (not to
> say we'll ignore input from the participants in those areas).
>
> That leaves these communities which those proposals would have continue
> but which don't have the required number of contributors:
>
> - Appliances
> - Approachability
> - Databases
> - Device Drivers
> - Games
> - HPC
> - Printing
> - Storage
> - System Administrators
>
> These communities don't seem to overlap with any of our other existing
> communities, so I propose we give them a chance to reform themselves.
>
> Each community mailing list would be sent a message asking the community
> to nominate 3 or more initial Core Contributors, and a Facilitator (who
> may be one of the Core Contributors) to notify the OGB of future grants.
>
> The communities will be given 30 days to present a list of nominations to
> the OGB - for any that do not do so, a message will be posted to
> opensolaris-announce giving the community at large another 30 days to
> present a proposal for reforming the community. If no acceptable
> proposals
> are reached in that time, the OGB will decide how to dispose of the
> community.
>
As I was recently named a "leader" of the Device Drivers community, I'd
like to nominate myself, Joerg, Jurgen, and Murayama as "core
contributors" for the Device Drivers community.
Alan DuBoff, I'm not sure that we've identified what the rules for core
contributor grants are within the community, but please make a note of this.
-- Garrett
