Call for Votes: New OSI-Editors List

[Zak Greant]

Hi Matt, Greetings All,

On 11/26/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu> wrote:
> > I think that I need to finish working up a strawman process - right
> > now we are discussing something that isn't at all well-defined yet.
>
> Fair enough, but I'd rather help draft the process then criticize it
> after it's fully formed.

I should have avoided colloquial language.

What I suggest is this:

I'll finish working up what I think that editors should do and present
it to the group.

This will not be a finished document or process, but instead will help
to ensure that people have some idea of what I want and how I want it
to happen, rather than people making broad assumptions based on a few
labels (like 'editor') and a (likely) incomplete review of the
commented triage that I did.

> I suppose that's reasonable (though an FAQ can be useful without
> containing solely true FAQs), but how can people ask questions on
> OSI-editors if they're not members of the list?

There should be no discussion of the broader issues happening on the
editor's list. That isn't what the list or the role is for.

Discussions should happen in the appropriate public forum.

Want to suggest a question about open source licensing, suggest it on
the license-discuss@ list. This is where the people who care about
those issues will be hanging out. If it goes right to the editors
list, then the editors move from being facilitators to being
gatekeepers.

-- 
Cheers!
--zak