On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 02:13:20PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote: > Personally I am not sure whether SPI would be the right way to do it or > not, I am a bit wary of it being too Debian biased, but I could be > convinced otherwise.
I don't think it's the /perfect/ organisation by any means, but let's consider the requirements: - Membership open to significant contributors to 'Linux' [1] - Has a voting process - Reasonably agnostic Maybe an organisation like Linux International could handle this too, but I don't know whether they have a membership process. > Given that the git commit rate has already been used for a number of > appointments, and partially to select the cabal which currently have the > option to vote for the TAB. It seems pretty to set a threshold such that > anyone with more than X commits (random number out of a hat, say 5) will > get a vote - one vote per person. This avoids the issue of people who > send out 317 patches of one-liners for comments to the MAINTAINERS file > will gain an unproportional number of votes. I don't have the impression > that there is a hierachy within the KS attendees providing them a number > of votes based on their number of contributions either? I ran the election last year (by counting hands) and there was no weighting by contribution ;-) More important though is the expressed desire for the TAB to be more than kernel people. [1] Is Linux even the right term? The work done by the former FSG is relevant to BSDs and Solaris. Not to mention the kernel vs distro discussion. -- "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
