Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 89100 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2002 08:31:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 89089 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2002 08:31:38 -0000 From: "Carsten Ziegeler" To: Subject: RE: [proposal] board resolution version 1.1 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:34:04 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <3DE9F69A.60909@apache.org> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 02.12.2002 09:31:48, Serialize by Router on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 5.0.8 |June 18, 2001) at 02.12.2002 09:31:50, Serialize complete at 02.12.2002 09:31:50 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N +1 Carsten > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:stefano@apache.org] > Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 12:47 PM > To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org > Subject: Re: [proposal] board resolution version 1.1 > > > Steven Noels wrote: > > David Crossley wrote: > > > >> Earlier in this thread i alerted the list to what i see > >> as a major flaw. I think that the answer is simple: > >> The initial PMC is formed from "all committers" - the > >> whole list at xml-cocoon2/who.xml no matter what their > >> status. They can take themselves off the PMC if they > >> wish. No distinction is the best way. > > > > > > To be really correct, I assume we need use the avail list: > > > > bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xml-cocoon2 > > avail| > > > > twl,stefano,balld,ricardo,rubys,ben,zvia,giacomo,gears,bmclaugh, > > bloritsch,rossb,jeremy,greenrd,dims,ssahuc,prussell,cziegeler,donaldp, > > mman,sylvain,vgritsenko,haul,morrijr,crossley,ovidiu,tcurdt,gianugo, > > froehlich,huber,dirkx,butlermh,nicolaken,ivelin,kpiroumian,shannon, > > proyal,stephan,coliver,crafterm,acoliver,stevenn,bdelacretaz > > > > |xml-cocoon,xml-cocoon2,xml-cocoon2-apps,xml-site,xml-commons > > > > ... and invite all people explicitely. People who have lost interest in > > Cocoon won't answer the invitation then. > > I like this. > > I also agree with David that 'active committer' is not exactly easy to > define (also, that's right, from that standard I'm not that 'active' > code-wise) > > So, what about doing this: > > 1) I write email to everyone listed there (and will copy this mail list) > > 2) they have 72 hours to reply to that email indicating their interest > in partecipating (replying privately to me or publicly as they wish) > > 3) at the end, I'll post here the list of people that replied and > we'll include them in the proposal. > > [if they take longer to reply, we'll add them anyway, we don't need to > be that strict] > > NOTE: the message will contain a description of what does it mean to be > part of a PMC. > > What do you think? > > -- > Stefano Mazzocchi > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org