On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Alan Burlison<[email protected]> wrote: > Peter Tribble wrote: > >>> There is a 1:1 mapping between the data for CCs in the CGs and the >>> Electorate data, so the split is mainly just an implementation detail. >> >> If you update one, does the other get updated to follow it? > > Yes, manually, when the OGB approves the CC grant.
OK, so the two *are* separate. That suggests a way forward: simply sever the connection between the two, and administer them separately. That would mostly solve the problem. The terminology would need to be clarified - either the OGB issues a policy stating that the use of the term "Core Contributor" in the foo collective has nothing to do with the Constitution and should be interpreted as a website administrator role, or the terminology in the auth app could be changed. Something like, I don't know, "Leader" would have been acceptable. >From a constitutional point of view, the term itself doesn't matter - all that's really required is that we don't pick a term defined by the Constitution. >> But the question was about Contributors, not CCs. I'll ask again: does the >> new auth app store Contributor grants? > > If you mean 'grant' as in the current poll app, there is no such thing as a > C grant. Of course there is. There are over 800 grants (for want of a better term, "designations" would be more accurate) for almost 700 Contributors. You can't just ignore the Constitution and throw all that away. This could be dealt with in the same way as I suggest for Core Contributors above, but presumably would involve extra work to store the Contributor list separately? -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ website-discuss mailing list [email protected]
