Re: progress on OE organization issues

[Phil Blundell <pb@reciva.com>]

On Thu, 2009-06-11 at 08:48 +0200, Esben Haabendal wrote:
> According to the babelfish translation of the statues, only active
> members are given votes.
> 
> I believe it is worth noting that thit ties in the current SCM architecture into
> the statues.  If someone decided to use a more distributed approach (fx. using
> pull-requests instead of commit access), these rules would not give them
> voting rights.  Any reason to involve SCM architecture into the statues?

There doesn't seem to be anything in the statutes which talks about
commit access specifically.  According to the KDE translation of the
statutes, an active membership:

"will be granted if suggested by a member and supported by two other
active members, if the general meeting decides to grant it or if a
simple majority of the active members is obtained by means of an
internet vote. The main criterion for granting membership should be the
candidate’s commitment over a longer period of time and the
contributions he/she made in order to fulfil the Association’s aims".

and, allowing for the slightly garbled translation that you get out of
babelfish, the version on the oe wiki seems to be saying basically the
same thing.  So I don't think there is anything to prevent a
non-committing supporter from becoming an active supporter and gaining
voting rights, so long as they undertake to further the e.V.'s aims in
some other way.

But, if the statutes really do talk about SCMs specifically in some
clause that I've overlooked, then I agree this is probably a mistake.

p.