[Squeakfoundation] Decision time: Are SCG the steward of the
kernel as proposed?
danielv at netvision.net.il
Tue Mar 11 18:31:21 CET 2003
I don't know if votes are that important (in the absence of any dissent,
at least), but yes anyway.
goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:
> Hi fellow Guides!
> When I just wrote the "monthly status report" I realized that we haven't
> really decided about "giving" SCG the Stewardship of the kernel. Of
> course, we guides are by no means "dictators" but we do have a
> responsibility to move discussions into decisions and after reading
> through this thread (the post from Alexandre Bergel felt like the
> "official request" from SCG) it looks to me that everyone is in favour
> of this arrangement.
> So someone needs to "hit the club in the desk", or whatever you call it.
> We talked a bit about what being a Steward means and we more or less
> came to the conclusion that we don't want to set any rules at this
> point. It is better to move ahead and learn. The only "guideline" that
> Andreas mentioned would be that as a Steward you simply need to be "more
> careful" when evolving the package - you obviously have much more
> dependents maintaining something in the kernel.
> What we all wanted was some form of charter from SCG what they plan etc
> but I think we have a pretty good picture already and it probably will
> not affect the decision here - which is more a question of trust in
> their capability and motives. :-)
> So, just to move forward one step:
> Can we Guides agree to give SCG this Stewardship? I vote yes.
> Let us all (us Guides that is) reply to this post so that we get a full
> count (6) and then we can make it "official", unless of course someone
> is against or still have things to discuss in which case we will just
> have to discuss further.
> regards, Göran
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> Squeakfoundation at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the Squeakfoundation