On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:35:23PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
> On 2016-10-18 9:51 AM, Matt S Trout wrote:
> >What say ye?
> I don't have much to add that hasn't been said by others.
> Assuming that "modifying the rules" includes "modifying the list of
> voting members" ...
"Amend this document" absolutely includes the lists, hence the comment
about PAUSE perms.
> I agree that it would be good to get this document into the
> repository and use it as a starting point for a more official
> That should help prevent or unstick some analysis paralysis, as it
> would give a reasonably safe starting place, where uncontroversial
> things have been formalized, and anything needing changing about
> governance can be changed without holding up the other stuff.
That was basically the ideal. Minimum Viable Governance.
> As an initial followup, I propose talking with the remainder of
> Peter's EXAMPLE preferred core team, those not also in Matt's list,
> namely HAARG and SYSPETE in that order, and see if they would be
> interested in being Voting Members.
This is among the list of possibilities I had in mind enabling as I
figured out the Nomic-like bits. But I figured sticking with the initial
list I had meant we could figure that part out later rather than it
becoming one more axis along which bikeshedding could occur now.
Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue
Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN
commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.
Searchable Archive: http://firstname.lastname@example.org