public? Re: Call for Votes: New OSI-Editors List

[Ernest Prabhakar]

Hi Zak & Matt,

On Nov 24, 2007, at 7:37 PM, Zak Greant wrote:
>> I see why a new list is needed (it will be focused on meta-issues
>> relating to process, as opposed to actual consideration of licenses),
>> but am not sure limiting membership in the new list is necessary.
>
> I'd prefer to treat membership in the editor's group as something like
> commit access on a free/open software project.

Exactly.   Really, this is about getting new "committers", who happen  
to be collected on a particular mailing list for convenience.   Given  
the emotional nature of open source -- and the legal sensitivity of  
many of these topics -- I want to have a small list of trusted people  
who are able to edit it.

> I'd also prefer it that the editors are nominated by community members
> and that the nominations are validated by the community at large.

I like the idea of open nominations, but I'd lean more towards letting  
the existing editors have the final say as to who gets to join --  
again, the way most open source projects work.

>> Also, is this meant to have private archives?
>
> I would prefer public archives.

I think public archives are a useful idea, though we should also have  
a "no-archive" option for sensitive items (legal, personnel) that  
wouldn't be appropriate for a public archive.

-- Ernie P.