Don't apologise. Criticism of the current process leads to direct reform... it's democracy in motion. :)
cheers, steve Brian Nitz wrote: > I can help out with this if you think it's appropriate. Sorry for the > complaints/criticism of the current process. > Shawn Walker wrote: >> On 13/11/2007, Glynn Foster <Glynn.Foster at sun.com> wrote: >> >>> Hey, >>> >>> Shawn Walker wrote: >>> >>>> On 13/11/2007, Glynn Foster <Glynn.Foster at sun.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> How about we try this for the desktop community, and do a trial >>>>> run to see how >>>>> it works? I'd be happy to come up with a simple form for people to >>>>> fill in >>>>> similar to GNOME's - >>>>> >>>>> http://foundation.gnome.org/membership/application.php >>>>> >>>>> and get a few people from the community approving them? Given that >>>>> we have 2 >>>>> roles in the constitution currently, one for contributor and the >>>>> other for core >>>>> contributor, we need some way of dividing them. Anyone have any >>>>> thoughts? >>>>> >>>> That seems like a great idea. However, who will the applications go >>>> to, and how will they view them? >>>> >>> To a few people interested in administering them? We could set up >>> the idea of a >>> desktop membership committee that handles the requests, and hope >>> they don't go >>> into a black hole? :) >>> >> >> That seems quite reasonable :) >> >> -- stephen lau | stevel at opensolaris.org | www.whacked.net
