Question about membership.
Dear all,
Following the ‘Membership procedures’ GR, discussion on membership were started
after the Lenny release, but eventually stopped. In this thread it was proposed
to trust DDs to nominate other members and I found the idea very interesting.
In order to make it more consensual, there is probably a need for making
concessions like shortlisting the trusted DDs according to some criteria like
the time they have already spent in the project. I would actually be tempted to
propose a more variable but more symbolic measurment of time: having been part
of the project for at least one full release cycle.
I have put membership issues as a first priority in my platform. Partly because
I have contributeed to the rejection of a proposal and feel resposible to not
leave the Project in inaction, partly because I think that the the contribution
of DMs is growing and I do not feel like leaving them out of the project. In my
platform, I suggest in my second priority (less restricted operations) that
social control can replace technical control. I think that most DMs could be
DDs now.
If I am elected DPL, I will re-open the discussion and lead them in a way that
maximises everybody's contribution, for instance by making pauses if necessary,
and by posting neutral summaries. After the discussion reaches conclusion, I
will initiate a GR.
So my question to other candidates is simple: what is your opinion and program
about membership?
Have a nice day,
--
Charles
Reply to: