Alan Burlison wrote: > Jim Walker wrote: > >> So in the new website is this true? >> >> Community Group:Contributor = poll:Contributor >> Community Group:Core Contributor = poll:Core Contributor > > Yes, CG status has been preserved.
Let me restate my concerns about the new website roles: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/web/transition-roles-collectives/ In the current website we just have the Leader website role which combines admin and editing functions *independently of constitutional roles*. The Leader website role is used in CGs and Projects and User Group Projects. There are also Affiliate roles which form collective subgroups that are used with the SCM console to control who can commit to source repos. Note: on the current website, the Contributor and Core Contributor constitutional roles are only maintained in the poll database and are not used in anyway relative to website rights. I agree the current Leader website role is overloaded, and breaking it into three website functional roles like: participant, editor/commiter and admin in the three collective types is a good idea and provides website access control flexibility per collective. However, the assertion that CGs MUST use constitutional roles to control website access is false. The OpenSolaris Constitution does not require this, and we haven't operated this way since the opensolaris.org website was created. If we go forward with the new website roles as described in the transition-roles-collectives document above, we will be forced to perform a formal CG vote anytime we wish to grant someone website edit rights (Contributor) or admin rights (Core Contributor). Not only will this unreasonably delay granting website access rights by at least 72 hours[1], it is likely to cause people to be given Constitutional roles they don't merit or want. Which is the opposite of what we want in terms of ease-of-use and a well qualified electorate. The Constitution DOES NOT require this mapping of website roles to constitutional roles. I recommend the CG website role terms be changed or new editor and admin roles be added to CGs so constitutional and website roles can remain independent like they are now. The OGB can clarify this in policy if needed. The OGB can decide how constitutional roles are used or not used beyond what is in the constitution. Cheers, Jim [1] ARTICLE VIII - http://opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/governance/ -- Jim Walker, http://blogs.sun.com/jwalker Sun Microsystems, Broomfield, Colorado
