[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [modeling-pmc] Call summary - 17 July 2007
|
I added maternity and sick leave as other notable exceptions to the 9 month
time frame. Note that the verbiage of our policy is different than WTP's in
that it says the 9 month period will only flag the attention of the Project
Lead/PMC, not automatically revoke Committer rights for an individual.
Best,
Rich
On 7/17/07 8:13 PM, "Ed Merks" <merks@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Rich,
>
> My one and only concern would be that someone taking maternity leave ought
> to be exempt while on leave.
>
>
> Ed Merks/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
> mailto: merks@xxxxxxxxxx
> 905-413-3265 (t/l 969)
>
>
>
>
>
> Richard Gronback
> <richard.gronback
> @borland.com> To
> Sent by: PMC members mailing list
> modeling-pmc-boun <modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ces@xxxxxxxxxxx cc
>
> Subject
> 07/17/2007 11:34 Re: [modeling-pmc] Call summary -
> AM 17 July 2007
>
>
> Please respond to
> PMC members
> mailing list
> <modeling-pmc@ecl
> ipse.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please review: http://wiki.eclipse.org/Modeling_Project_Committer_Policies
>
> I modified it a bit from the WTP one, per our discussion on the call.
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
>
>
> On 7/17/07 4:43 PM, "Richard Gronback" <richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Apologies for the poor quality audio on today?s call. I?ve copied
> Bjorn to let him know right away that we found the Asterisk
> Conference Call service to be largely unusable. In particular, we
> had trouble communicating with Jean in France, who was the one we
> were most hoping to accommodate by using the service. Also, we had a
> bad echo and fading. I?m sure there are some tips/tricks we need to
> take advantage of, if we decide to use it again. Bjorn, have others
> had success with it?
>
> A summary of each point from our agenda:
>
> Most agreed the basic policy for Committer removal followed by
> WebTools is appropriate for our use in Modeling. Rich will
> create a Wiki with the policy for review by the PMC.
> Ganymede: we?ll at least do as much as we did for Europa, and
> continue toward common build infrastructure, etc. We may also
> want to have a Modeling package added to EPP, and do what we
> can to at least appear more unified/integrated. Rich will
> update the Modeling plan for Ganymede.
> Most agreed that there is not likely to be much gained by
> having the Foundation vote on OMG matters on our behalf, as
> most contributors to Modeling are members and vote anyway. On
> the topic of coordinating with the modeldriven.org folks, we?ll
> look to meet with them at ESE, if not before (Jean might have
> proposed something else, but it was too hard to hear him).
> By the time we got to the Declarative QVT component proposal, I
> believe it was down to just Ed and I on the ?call?. Neither of
> us see any issues with the proposal, consider Compuware to have
> resigned from the component, and are happy to have it picked up
> by another team.
>
> Please comment on this summary with anything I?ve forgotten or got
> wrong.
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
>
>
> --
> Richard C. Gronback
> Borland Software Corporation
> richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx
> +1 860 227 9215_______________________________________________
> modeling-pmc mailing list
> modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> modeling-pmc mailing list
> modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc
--
Richard C. Gronback
Borland Software Corporation
richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1 860 227 9215
