Re: XML Graphics: draft charter, draft resolution update, items to discuss

Thank you, Cliff. This sounds like a very good idea. A lot better than
my current approach. Actually, this has the advantage of speeding things
up a bit and we could start the vote for the resolution almost
immediately. So if nobody objects, I will try to scrape together some
time this week to do this, unless someone beats me to it. :-) After all,
we don't already need the charter right now, but I am thankful that
people take their time to add their comments. I hope you don't mind if I
don't manage to work through all of it this evening.


On 28.06.2004 02:07:41 Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote on Sunday, June 27, 2004 6:28 AM:
> 
> > The Xerces people put all their active committers automatically into
> > the 
> > PMC. So question number one: Should we do that, too? I don't think
> > this 
> > is a bad idea. What do you people think about this and what are the
> > arguments for and against?
> 
> If you're interested in another approach...in the XMLBeans vote on
> the proposed resolution and PMC chair, I included an option for the
> committer to choose to become part of the PMC.  This meant that people
> who didn't vote at all weren't part of the PMC, and that people who 
> didn't want to be part of the PMC could passively decline.  I felt it 
> was important for a clearly intentional choice to take on the 
> responsibility of being on the PMC.  This method can also serve to
> naturally filter out committers who have not been very active 
> (unless they make a conscious act to renew their activity).  Of course,
> anyone missed could always be voted into the PMC at a later time, 
> depending on the established charter.
> 
> Anyway, just thought I'd throw that out there in case you find any
> merit in that approach.


Jeremias Maerki