[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] RE: Nominating Kim Moir

Distinguished Council,
 
the "process for nominating new members" is not new. Please read
 
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Architecture_Council/Membership#How_Do_I_Become_A_Member_of_the_Architecture_Council.3F
 
It clearly has step 1
"Nominations are discussed in a phone meeting"
 
for exactly the reasons that Boris cited (Big thanks Boris for bringing this up just in time!). We had set up this process shortly after I became chair of the AC, and I believe that it is still good (although I'm happy to discuss it again). I also agree with Dave C that the process should be a guideline which we don't need to follow religiously.
 
I'll gladly take suggestions for how to make our existing processes more known and obvious on the web pages (gee, I had to search them myself for a while, although I had written them some time back).
 
Regarding the current discussion,
Big +1 for Kim on the AC after reading Boris' and others' responses
Big +1 and thanks for Boris' comments
 
I'd also like to not that the questions I posted were never meant to question Kim's abilities, but they were meant to question the motives or rationale cited in the nomination. I still believe that being an AC member is a very highly visible sign of being an Eclipse Leader. And we can have working groups for tasks sponsored by the AC, even if not only AC members are in those groups.
 
Thanks
Martin
 


From: eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 12:03 AM
To: mik.kersten@xxxxxxxxxxx; eclipse.org-architecture-council
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] RE: Nominating Kim Moir

Already +1'ed Kim. Just want to +1 the process change too. It's always important to allow frank discussion and that's best done in a meeting where we can chose what to record. :).

:D

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Mik Kersten <mik@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Agreed.  I think it would work well to have a process suggestion of raising nominations on a call before putting forward the email vote.

Mik

> -----Original Message-----
> From: eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:eclipse.org-architecture-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Chris Aniszczyk
...
> > Perhaps we should restrict nominations to occur only during the phone
> call?
>
> I'm not against this and I think this would actually be a good idea.


_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council

IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.