>> About growing the PMC, I suppose we're looping here ;-). IIUC, again, I >> think the point is precisely to define those values/rules to be able to >> induct more serenely new PMC members while asking them to adhere to those >> definitions. >> > > I think that, so far, this idea has not found much favour with the broader > community. > I am not sure how you get someone to promise not to undertake enhancements > that result in too much code or add too much functionality. > > The actual wording of the proposed litmus test only indirectly addressed > this and seemed to be an attempt to codify a personality conflict with rules > that would hurt the long-term viability of the project by replacing > innovation with the group-think of an inner clique. > It also seemed to go against the principle of open source. > At least, that was the way it appeared to me as a community member outside > the PMC.
At the moment, the words themselves are meaningless (as they are still up for debate - and why this thread was created, so that they could be crafted by the community). Once there is some consensus they will be used in the future. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
