On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Sandy McArthur wrote:
On 3/16/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Previously I'd suggested that we should be cleaning up inactive committers
and inactive PMC members - because I'm a bit of a tidy-addict sometimes
and I enjoy deleting :)
A thread on [EMAIL PROTECTED] convinced me that this was half wrong though
- we shouldn't be worrying about cleaning up the large list of inactive
committers, they might come back and that would be great.
However I do still think we should be cleaning up the inactive PMC
members. The PMC represents the active committers entrusted with oversight
- so to have inactive committers on there is a detriment to its ability to
get the job done.
My proposal is that we create a file in SVN in which PMC members can list
themselves as being active. After 1 month, failure to appear in that list
will result in removal from the PMC. If it goes well we could consider
doing it periodically, or just when it feels like the numbers are getting
out of sync again.
Thoughts?
Yea, why over complicate this? Simply email the inactive PMC's known
email addresses explaining they have been inactive for an extended
period of time and whether or not they have a problem being
"de-PMC-ified". Try to contact them three times at two week intervals
and keep track of this either in svn or a bugzilla issue. After two
months of no response let other PMCs vote on the issue.
See Danny's email on us being lazy :)
I can definitely do this - just trying to avoid that much work and spam to
the mail lists as I think I would need to cc pmc@ or general@ on each
email - though I could do one big cc: email each week interval.
If consensus prefers this, I'll definitely work at finding time to go
ahead and do it.
Introducing a new tasks that only your buddies will likely know about
in order to maintain membership feels a bit like when the south (in
the USA years ago) introduced literacy tests to keep blacks from
voting.
It's fine that you have an agenda, but be straight forward and honest
about it. And don't make people jump through hoops so their possibly
conflicting positions are still binding.
Hope I'm not coming across like this.
My buddies in this case are described as: "People who read Jakarta mailing
lists". Ideally pmc@ and general@, though I can quite happily mail all the
-dev lists if we think there are pmc members not listening to the central
lists.
My agenda is to make things less messy. Am working hard to avoid taking
the direction of introducing small changes to lead the community in a
direction. That'd be the dishonest bit.
I guess this does have some link to my agenda to enforce the single
Jakarta community meme - but even in the multi-community meme, there'd be
no excuse for pmc members not being on general@ and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A pmc member who is not on pmc@ (and doesn't want to subscribe) has
effectively resigned in my view; pretty much the same for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
