On 10/09/2012 12:05 PM, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >>> @board: Should we unify the process that full maintainers are member by >>> default? >> >> I would say yes. I can't think of a situation where we'd like to >> exclude a maintainer from voting by default...and the opposite is easy >> to handle as the maintainer can simply not vote. The only >> precondition for voting, in my understanding, is that the maintainer >> must have at least one released package...By making these two groups >> overlap almost entirely, we could generate a voting roster with an SQL >> query in the web database which would be nice. >> >> Ihsan: I wonder if there is anything in the way the association was >> founded that precludes extending membership by default? > > The association can not "grab" you, you must apply for it by yourself. We > could > add this to maintainership application that you also apply for the association > which will be granted after release of the first package.
This would probably the bests solution. Ihsan -- [email protected] http://blog.dogan.ch/ _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
