On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: >>> The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition >>> of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which >>> was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. >> >> Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than >> meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient >> merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0). >> > > Isn't this easy to solve? All we need is for one proposed PMC-member > to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC > member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership. > > Is anyone willing to state this?
Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that the Board chooses to make. Regards, Dave > > -Rob > > >> >> Regards >> -- >> Ariel Constenla-Haile >> La Plata, Argentina
