Bob Scheifler wrote: > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: >> However, we do have a chance here to host the governance and spec >> process for JINI. >> >> Therefore, I'd like to propose that we create two podlings, one for JINI >> governance, and one for building the implementation and community around >> the working code that has been proposed. > > I'm extremely reluctant to start out with two podlings.
Why? I think we are talking about two very different community dynamics. > I'm not sure what "governance" you have in mind beyond the spec process, > but I don't believe we have sufficient commitments from people to keep > an equivalent of the existing Jini community standards process going > forward. How would it work? Would you give every committer a vote on the specs as they were created? What is the hurdle needed to get committer status? Participation in both? We understand how to do code communities here at the ASF, and no experience in how to do spec creation/governance. My recommendation is to not mix the two up. > I think our best shot at success is a single podling, which > maintains both specs and code under a single development process. How do you foresee the spec maintenance/creation/development process to work? > (And as such, the specs would no longer be "standards".) They aren't now, anyway :) geir --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
