Thank you, Cliff. This sounds like a very good idea. A lot better than my current approach. Actually, this has the advantage of speeding things up a bit and we could start the vote for the resolution almost immediately. So if nobody objects, I will try to scrape together some time this week to do this, unless someone beats me to it. :-) After all, we don't already need the charter right now, but I am thankful that people take their time to add their comments. I hope you don't mind if I don't manage to work through all of it this evening.
On 28.06.2004 02:07:41 Cliff Schmidt wrote: > Jeremias Maerki wrote on Sunday, June 27, 2004 6:28 AM: > > > The Xerces people put all their active committers automatically into > > the > > PMC. So question number one: Should we do that, too? I don't think > > this > > is a bad idea. What do you people think about this and what are the > > arguments for and against? > > If you're interested in another approach...in the XMLBeans vote on > the proposed resolution and PMC chair, I included an option for the > committer to choose to become part of the PMC. This meant that people > who didn't vote at all weren't part of the PMC, and that people who > didn't want to be part of the PMC could passively decline. I felt it > was important for a clearly intentional choice to take on the > responsibility of being on the PMC. This method can also serve to > naturally filter out committers who have not been very active > (unless they make a conscious act to renew their activity). Of course, > anyone missed could always be voted into the PMC at a later time, > depending on the established charter. > > Anyway, just thought I'd throw that out there in case you find any > merit in that approach. Jeremias Maerki --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
