Dmitriy, I don't think that you got a real answer to your section question.
The standard response to this would be a question in return. Instead of "remove inactive members and add new ones" why not just "add new ones". The point of this question is that inactive PMC members are not a problem (Apache culture is heavily designed to make this work) and they could be an asset in the future. So removing the inactive members is actually a slight negative to the project. The real key is the "add new ones" part of your suggestion. On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 1:07 PM Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > There are two independent questions here. > > ... > > 2) Inactive members removal: Lack of active PMCs member makes me thinks > that at some point some removal will be necessary. We can > continuously grow the roster for a TLP project, but sometimes I feel there > are ~30 members and only 5-7 active members. So why don't we narrow the > roster to 7 and invite new members? > > It looks reasonable that if you want a binding vote, approve releases, > propose new committers you need to join community communication channels > and be there. My idea is, first of all, ask PMCs if they want to stay or > leave and, second of all, to always keep committership, because it is based > on merit. > > And here for option 2, I don't have any severe issues to address. If it a > bad idea, not a problem. In that case, I also would be happy if I > understand this topic better. > >
