Sorry for the delay in responding. The changes audit was initially looking for discrepancies in the older ACK process which was closer to the 72 hours. All of it was a guide to find major discrepancies rather than any hard and fast things to correct.
I haven’t run that script for a while - between the initial sync up and sebb’s ongoing review the records are in good shape. It might still be useful to update from time to time, but I don’t know that the static audit makes sense to list in whimsy now. Cheers, Brett > On 20 Oct 2015, at 11:47 AM, Sam Ruby <[email protected]> wrote: > > Brett - thoughts? > > $ svn log -l 1 pmc-changes-record.txt > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > r55653 | brett | 2015-03-01 06:42:54 -0500 (Sun, 01 Mar 2015) | 2 lines > > prep for 20150324 meeting > > - Sam Ruby > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 8:31 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> I just noticed the change audit, e.g. at the end of: >> >> https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/axis >> >> It appears to derive the expected change date from the date of the >> NOTICE plus 72 hours. >> >> However that is hardly ever going to agree with the date in >> committee-info.txt. >> >> The normal process is to wait for the 72hrs to expire before inviting >> the person. >> They then have to accept (and may need to get an account), and the PMC >> chair has to actually update the CI file. That cannot generally happen >> in a day. >> >> It's only possible for the date to agree if a provisional invite is >> sent and accepted before the 72 hours are up, and the PMC chair >> updates CI as soon as the 72 hours are up. >> >> However it might be useful to report if the NOTICE e-mail cannot be >> found, or if the date is before the 72hour expiry. Or possibly if the >> CI date is much later than the NOTICE mail (though this does happen >> fairly often)
