I like it.
When I became a committer, I didn't realize the connection between being a
committer and member of the PMC (I think there was a 9 month gap).
WILL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 8:23 PM
Subject: Simplifying the PMC
(from a post on commons-dev where the idea occurred to me)
I'm thinking that we should just set in stone a date at which point a new
committer is listed on the pmc list and asked if they should be on the pmc
(to the person nominating them as committers).
So let's say Fred becomes a committer today. This would be noted in a
file. In 6->9 months time (ie when the chair does the report), any 6+
months old committers would involve a question to the person who
originally nominated them as committers as to why they shouldn't be
nominated to the pmc.
So culture change. One in which people are challenged to exclude, not
expected to remember to include, and one in which the chair (but more
hopefully the process) handles the remembering.
Any thoughts?
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
