Moritz Muehlenhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Clint Adams wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 10:50:29PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > >> * Infrastructure teams have to decide to accept or reject candidates who > >> nominated themselves. The basic requirements are: > > > > Why should teams decide on their own membership? I don't think this > > should be allowed. > > What's the alternative? Letting anyone in who wants, even if the > rest of the team distrusts them?
That's a false dichotomy. There are other models besides open membership and self-perpetuation. Even if I think conditional open membership would do the project a lot of good, another obvious model for debian is to allow both self-perpetuation and appointees by an oversight group - tech-ctte perhaps? I think I've spotted another problem with the "second edit" - does it fail if all members of a team become idle simultaneously? Should there be a default of accepting a new member if the team doesn't decide? Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 - Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, consumer and workers co-operative member http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ - Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
