Thilo Goetz wrote:
It's just that to an outsider, it is totally unclear what that
means. And it may be impossible to really convey the meaning
of it in a few sentences. So why don't we just say so.
Make it absolutely clear that the diversity of the community
will be judged by the IPMC based on the overall conduct of the
project, mailing list, commit activity etc. I know it's there
already, but it could be reinforced. Perhaps at the end of the
"Creating an Open and Diverse community" (community should be
capitalized, btw) paragraph: "The IPMC will judge diversity of
the project based on many criteria. These include mailing list
activity, commit activity and the affiliations of the committers.
There is no single sufficient criterion, it is the overall conduct
of the development community that counts." Or something like that.
One obvious problem with such approaches is that the criteria will
become very unevenly/unfairly applied. Some projects might just "slip
past" with very little scrutiny, while others suddenly rack up a lot of
discussion, where everybody has something to say and the project gets
lots of (somewhat unwanted!) scrutiny. The amount of scrutiny and
subjective evaluation will be affected by time of year, holidays and
daily moods of the PMC members etc etc..!
An idea would be to have a pretty clear set of rules, with X committers,
where all must actively have participated in email and subversion
activity, blah blah - SOMETHING that can be objectively evaluated and
the project may strive towards - and then some final line about "this
will however be up to a final subjective evaluation where obvious
attempts at circumventing/bypassing/"minimal-efforting" the system will
(hopefully) be caught and stopped."
Endre.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
