Mailing-List: contact dev-help@river.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@river.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4E260405.6070801@zeus.net.au>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 08:24:05 +1000
From: Peter Firmstone <jini@zeus.net.au>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080531)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@river.apache.org
Subject: Re: PMC Branding Responsibilities
References: 
 <CAEDB+kVXfYCHExa7KqEheRLEp37sJT6EDutFiPRmMTu9Stm33w@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E260171.40908@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <4E260171.40908@acm.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> I've read the document, and am thinking about its implications.
>
> I am not a trademark enforcer. I have no training as a trademark 
> enforcer, and no interest in learning to be one. I did not understand 
> that joining the PMC meant becoming a trademark enforcer.
> Patricia
>

I must admit I didn't either at the time.   From memory, Sim suggested 
earlier that we should treat committer and PMC member status separately, 
I think he was right.

Perhaps in future when we offer someone committer status, we should 
point them to the relevant PMC document and ask them if they'd like to 
be a PMC member also.

It is my understanding that a committer doesn't have to be a PMC member, 
but a PMC member must be a committer, is that correct?

Peter.

>
> On 7/19/2011 1:28 PM, Tom Hobbs wrote:
>> This is primarily an email for the PMC.  Can you all please ensure
>> that you read the PMC Branding Responsibilities page [1].
>>
>> Can you please reply to this page when you've done so.  Making sure
>> we've all read it is needs to form part of our next board report.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/responsibility.html
>>
>
>