Keith, I'd vote for it. Are you planning to propose it as a formal amendment?
Thanks, Nick Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 11:16:12AM -0700, Nicholas Solter wrote: > >> Actually, I was told the opposite -- that one remains a Member even if >> the core contributor grants are revoked. >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-October/002781.html > > 4.3 implies that Membership goes away with the last Core Contributor > grant. However, 7.8 reads in part: > > # In addition, each designation of Core Contributor status results > # in a grant of Member status for the OpenSolaris Community as a > # whole, with a duration of two (2) years from the date of said > # grant ... > > Which implies that they're separate things with the same expiration > date. > > This needs to be clarified. The simplest way to do so is to amend the > constitution as follows: > > ---8<--- > > Proposition 1. Initiative constitutional amendment. Changes to > Membership definition. > > Section 4.2 shall be altered to read in full: "Composition. Every > natural person shall be considered a Member of the OpenSolaris > Community, entitled to exercise the powers described in section 4.1, > who is a Core Contributor to one or more Community Groups as defined > in section 7.8. No other person shall be so entitled." > > Sections 4.3 and 4.4 shall be removed. > > Section 7.8 shall be altered to remove the sentence "In addition, each > designation of Core Contributor status results in a grant of Member > status for the OpenSolaris Community as a whole, with a duration of > two (2) years from the date of said grant, as described in sections > 4.2 and 4.3 above." > > ---8<--- > > Like so many changes, it's an improvement by deletion. > > A more ambitious effort could attempt to remove all the references to > Members and just call them Core Contributors everywhere. I'm not > willing to invest that much effort; the keys are to make sure they're > defined to be the same set of people and to remove the need for > separate acceptance of Membership. People wear the Member hat when > acting in the context of the OpenSolaris Community and the Core > Contributor hat when acting in the context of a Community Group. > >> I guess the difference is that in your case you explicitly resigned? > > It's clear that Mr. Burlison wishes to be neither a Core Contributor > to any Group nor a Member. So regardless of what the actual > constitutional intent may have been, he's neither. > -- Nicholas Solter, Solaris Cluster Development http://blogs.sun.com/nsolter
