David Crossley wrote:
It would be better if we could announce them to dev@ list at step 3 and just say that there are more procedural steps which will take some time.
+1
However there are two potential problems there: What if the new person refused to submit the CLA? I cannot see why - it doesn't take away any of their rights.
If someone does refuse then that would lead to an interesting and valuable onlist discussion. Although I agree, I don't think anyone ever would.
What if the board denied them being a PMC member? I cannot see why they would, but that procedural step still needs to happen.
As I understand it (based on a later mail of yours in this thread) this is a legal step. I suppose there may be a situation in which the board "now something we don't" about an individual and deny them membership. Again, if this were ever to happen (I doubt it would) it would be for an extremely good reason. Having the denial in public would probably be an advantage in this instance too (although I doubt we would discuss the reasons for it, simply make a statement).
In those cases we would need to retract our statements to the dev list. I am happy to live with the consequences of that, so i propose to change our procedural docs to do the dev announcement after step 3. If anyone has issues then speak up, otherwise i will just do it.
+1 Ross
