Rather than ammending the bylaws, wouldn't it be simpler that you (and
any others that may feel sidelined) file a request to the PMC asking to
be granted committer status? According to bylaw 11, this is what you need:
/
//Bylaw 11. Committer access is received by committing code and getting
sponsorship by two existing Committers, a nominator and a seconder. Upon
fulfillment of these conditions, a PMC member will give write access.//
/
Best,
Juan Pablo
On 26/02/2020 18:09, Scoop Gracie wrote:
May users without PMC or committer status propose a PMC vote?
Amend Bylaw 5: "The project's Committers are responsible for the
project's technical management. Committers are developers who have
write access to the project's source repositories, or who have
contributed code to Apertium in any meaningful and significant way in
the past six months. Committers may cast binding votes on any
technical discussion regarding the project."
Amend Bylaw 23.G: "After 7 days to amend the census, a definitive
census of Committers with right to vote will be published by the
Election Board. Only Committers with email addresses known to the
current PMC or the Election Board will be allowed to vote."
This would include all PR contributors, as well as devs with write
access. It would also ensure that only devs we can contact are included.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:04 AM Scoop Gracie <scoopgra...@gmail.com
<mailto:scoopgra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Well, I consider myself a fairly active contributor, but I do not
have write access to any repo. Therefore, I am excluded from
voting, even though I am just as much an Apertium developer as
many of the other devs (who get to vote). IMHO, that seems unfair.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:02 AM Mikel L. Forcada <m...@dlsi.ua.es
<mailto:m...@dlsi.ua.es>> wrote:
I might be wrong, but I understood that pull requests are the
way in which casual developers contribute. If a developer
contributes through PRs in a sustained way, they should be
named committers.
Mikel
El 26/2/20 a les 17:57, Scoop Gracie ha escrit:
Because now, many contributions come through pull requests.
Those definitions exclude any contributors who do not have
write access, even if they have contributed significantly to
Apertium.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:55 AM Mikel L. Forcada
<m...@dlsi.ua.es <mailto:m...@dlsi.ua.es>> wrote:
Why is it SF-related? It talks about the project's source
repositories,
without reference to SF.
Mikel
El 26/2/20 a les 17:49, Scoop Gracie ha escrit:
> That is an outdated, SF-based definition. Shouldn't
developers who
> have submitted PRs be equally eligible?
--
Mikel L. Forcada http://www.dlsi.ua.es/~mlf/
Departament de Llenguatges i Sistemes Informàtics
Universitat d'Alacant
E-03690 Sant Vicent del Raspeig
Spain
Office: +34 96 590 9776
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
--
Mikel L. Forcadahttp://www.dlsi.ua.es/~mlf/
Departament de Llenguatges i Sistemes Informàtics
Universitat d'Alacant
E-03690 Sant Vicent del Raspeig
Spain
Office: +34 96 590 9776
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
