Re: [GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] Comment regarding PSC election

On 26/07/16 00:05, Markus Neteler wrote: On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Michael Barton wrote: My perspective is that active contributors to the project should vote. How to define them is a more complicated issue and one of the things that prompted the long email

Re: [GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] Comment regarding PSC election

>This sounds like a good interim step for now. It is something that the new PSC should continue to work on. seconded. - best regards Helmut -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Fwd-GRASS-dev-Comment-regarding-PSC-election-tp5278043p5278131.html Sent from

Re: [GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] Comment regarding PSC election

This sounds like a good interim step for now. It is something that the new PSC should continue to work on. Michael C. Michael Barton Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change Head, Graduate Faculty

Re: [GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] Comment regarding PSC election

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Michael Barton wrote: > My perspective is that active contributors to the project should vote. How to > define them is a > more complicated issue and one of the things that prompted the long email > chain in the PCS IIRC. Indeed

Re: [GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] Comment regarding PSC election

I add that there is probably no perfect solution to this question. There is no intent to be exclusive. But tt is not always easy to ID who is actively contributing. For example, compiling and disseminating GRASS binaries is an essential contribution to the project, but anyone maintaining

Re: [GRASS-PSC] [GRASS-dev] Comment regarding PSC election

My perspective is that active contributors to the project should vote. How to define them is a more complicated issue and one of the things that prompted the long email chain in the PCS IIRC. Michael C. Michael Barton Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity