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.
--
Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!"
Fishworks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!"
