Craig Russell wrote: > Granqvist, Hans wrote: >> Just a few thoughts on the process: How do you envision editorship >> of the spec? Would all committers be editors? > In successful spec writing projects that I've been involved in, there > has been an editor for the entire specification or an editor per > major area, for the reasons given below.
The core value is consensus-based development in an open collaborative
community. The rest is technique, which can evolve as experience
dictates. I would put forth a strawman that the "Editor" role is at least
somewhat analogous to the "Release Manager" for code. Either way, the
deliverable still needs to be approved by the PMC.
> > I would propose a different set of 'spec committers' for two main
> > reasons.
I agree with them, but they seem hardly different from the reasons why
committers on one project, e.g., Cocoon, might not be the best people to
be committers on another project, e.g., Derby. And, yes, I would expect
somewhat different, but not entirely disjoint, self-selecting populations.
On the other hand, that's equally true of the docs group within the HTTP
Server project.
--- Noel
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
