Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>> Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful in Harmony with a
>>> slightly different model, where we didn't just sweep committers in
>>> except for the mentors and champion, because we didnt' start with any
>> code.
>>
>> Yes, it should be a Shall, since it has been made quite clear that the
>> majority of people want a binding list. The work you did on Harmony:
>>
>>> We treated the Initial Committer list as an indication of interest, and
>>> just looked for people that followed through once the project got
started.
>>
>> would have to be done PRIOR to the vote.
> How? How do you see if the people actually engaged in the community
> until after it got formed and working?
What problem are you trying to solve? Garrett's view is that you basically
"discarded" the Initial Committer list, treated it as advisory, and dealt
with Committers after the fact. So a minimal Initial Committer list would
be null except for the Mentors.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
