VOTE thread - Code, ticket, doc repository location(s)
russ
Voting closes: December 1, 00:00 UTC.
Tensions:
Minimize overhead
Maintain flexibility
Facilitate access control to membership
Read-only to world
Keep open to eventual XMOS collaboration
russ
can use it as a test case, then vote on whether it suits us, possibly
making it official in our vote.
Because it seems to be the most popular in the discussion so far, I
would start an Organization at Github, but this is not a binding
thing, until the vote.
The vote can be extended to agree to whatever major configuration
options we decide on (like who can join, view membership lists, etc).
I would make a list of important choices for review.
We should also vote on a person to have oversight of the repositories,
until we have a proper board in place to take proper ownership. (It's
always going to readable by world, so ownership is about ensuring
quality/fairness/our legal goals, rather than blocking access to
contents.)
In the meantime, the overseer should give access to everyone who has
contributed to these discussions so far, and anyone who joins us who
we expect to become member of the Foundation.
So basically we should:
reduce any risk to any of us, or the growing membership
be fair, but also want to capture the evident energy in the
discussion
make progress fast.
(Easier to ask forgiveness, than wait for permission, etc.)
So I'll do this in about 6 hours from now, if I don't hear any strong
objections.) And if I do go ahead and objections are raised, I will
take it apart again.
Al Wood
> Does anyone object to my creating a repository, as a placeholder? We
> can use it as a test case, then vote on whether it suits us, possibly
> making it official in our vote.
>
> Because it seems to be the most popular in the discussion so far, I
> would start an Organization at Github, but this is not a binding
> thing, until the vote.
I'm OK with that.
>
> The vote can be extended to agree to whatever major configuration
> options we decide on (like who can join, view membership lists, etc).
> I would make a list of important choices for review.
>
> We should also vote on a person to have oversight of the repositories,
> until we have a proper board in place to take proper ownership. (It's
> always going to readable by world, so ownership is about ensuring
> quality/fairness/our legal goals, rather than blocking access to
> contents.)
That would be you if you create for now..
> In the meantime, the overseer should give access to everyone who has
> contributed to these discussions so far, and anyone who joins us who
> we expect to become member of the Foundation.
>
> So basically we should:
> reduce any risk to any of us, or the growing membership
> be fair, but also want to capture the evident energy in the
> discussion
> make progress fast.
>
> (Easier to ask forgiveness, than wait for permission, etc.)
>
> So I'll do this in about 6 hours from now, if I don't hear any strong
> objections.) And if I do go ahead and objections are raised, I will
> take it apart again.
>
russ
On Nov 21, 11:42 am, Al Wood <a...@folknology.com> wrote:
> > We should also vote on a person to have oversight of the repositories,
> > until we have a proper board in place to take proper ownership. (It's
> > always going to readable by world, so ownership is about ensuring
> > quality/fairness/our legal goals, rather than blocking access to
> > contents.)
>
> That would be you if you create for now..
anything that anyone wants to try.
I agree to hand over control to a majority vote of members of this
group on a vote in the interim, and in any case to the board when it
is seated.
micke.l...@hotmail.com
really understand the need for it after downloading XMOS zip files for
1½ years.
