+1 I agree that interested volunteers should:
* setup a Wiki area describing the TLP process and rationales , AND * give notice to each and every Jakarta DEV list that the area exists. My main beef is that we have not done due diligence in alerting ALL of the subprojects of the latest developments. I've outlined a wiki page as described by this proposal <http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?JakartaPMCTopLevelProjectApplication>, and setup a draft TLP resolution. I would also volunteer to subscribe to each of the DEV lists and post a message pointing them to the archive of this thread. (Unless another volunteer already has an account setup to do such things. ) Whether a subproject follows through or not can be totally up to each subproject. The important thing is that we do the due diligence in making sure *everyone* concerned has been apprised. -Ted. ----- Original message ----------------------------------------> From: Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Jakarta General List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 14:39:30 +0000 Subject: [PROPOSAL] Proactively encourage TLP status >There has been considerable emphasis on this list over recent weeks for the >sticking plaster approach. That is to make small minor changes to Jakarta in >the hope the board will stop hassling us. This could be because this is the >consensus view and I'm an odd one out. Or it could be that those in favour >of multiple TLPs just can't be bothered with the arguing. So I thought I'd >place the alternative proposal on the table. If you like it, +1 it. <SNIP/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
