On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 9:56 PM, John Plocher<john.plocher at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Peter Tribble<peter.tribble at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Bucket 1 - those "communities" that have never had any core contributors
>>
>> Appliances > Chinese Users > Databases > Games
>> HPC > Observability > SVM > UFS
>>
>> Bucket 2 - those that have no current core contributors
>>
>> Approachability > Printing > PowerPC (only has 1)
...
>
> I'd suggest a formulaic email be sent to each targeted group, maybe
> something like:
>
> According to the constitution, this community should be terminated due
> to its not having at least 3 core contributors. ?The OGB can deal with
> such groups by
> ? ?A) Terminating them (see _website_doc_url_ for what this means)
> ? ?B) Designating at least 3 new Core Contributors in order to
> revitalize the community, or
> ? ?C) Merge this group with another.
>
> The OGB is biased towards, and will choose "termination", unless the
> community members themselves step up and make a case for one the other
> options within the next 30 days.
A modification of the form of words:
The foo community has less than the required minimum of 3 Core Contributors
to govern its affairs and, according to the constitution, should be terminated.
The OpenSolaris Governing Board can deal with the situation by:
A) Terminating the community (see _website_doc_url_ for what this means)
B) Designating at least 3 new Core Contributors in order to
revitalize the community, or
C) Merge this community with another (possibly as a project).
Unless the community members themselves step up and make a case for one of
the other options within the next 30 days, the OGB will recommend termination.
--
-Peter Tribble
http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/
