On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 19:52 -0500, Shelley Powers wrote: > Sam Ruby wrote: > > On 08/25/2010 08:04 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: > >> Sam Ruby wrote: > >>> On 08/25/2010 06:28 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: > >>>> I'm volunteering to write a change proposal for Issue 117. > >>> > >>> In that case, I encourage you to rejoin the working group. > >> > >> Is this a requirement? I can understand that it is simpler to only have > >> members propose change proposals--they need to be shepherded through the > >> decision process. I can withhold my submission for a time to see if > >> others volunteer. > > > > Being a member involves some binding obligations involving IP rights > > to the contributions you make. Agreeing to those terms is not optional. > > > > - Sam Ruby > > > I am assuming there is a form or some such thing I can agree to, if > that's the only concern.
The form in the case is contained within the invited expert application. > People outside the group do file bugs. They need to have the ability to > pursue the bug if they're unhappy with the resolution. It's one thing to file bugs against a specification and expressed whether or not you agree with the decision of the group. It's an other to contribute to the group to the point of writing change proposals. Shelley, I understand your reluctance to be part of the group but, if you're going to be involved with it, I think you should be part of it. We won't (and can't anyway) force you to read every single email on public-html and you might in fact only interact around your change proposals. But starting to write change proposals without being part of the group doesn't make sense to me, Philippe
