Open Stack

On 06/12/2014 11:46 AM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> On Thu 12 Jun 2014 08:04:48 AM PDT, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>> FWIW, I expect the infra team are unlikely to make these changes in the
>> short term because the change would automatically happen as part of a
>> switch to the DCO, whereas trying to implement the change with our
>> current CLA system would actually require a bunch of additional work.
> 
> Just to clarify, removing the committer == foundation's individual 
> member is not simply a gerrit issue and I think requires deeper 
> thoughts. We have a couple of other processes that are built around 
> that assumption and changing those will require changes, whether we 
> switch to DCO or not. Voting for PTL and TC elections are examples of 
> such processes. Another thing that may be impacted by the removal of 
> constraint are the free invitations to Design Summits, currently sent 
> to 'ATCs' (defined in 3.b.i 
> http://www.openstack.org/legal/technical-committee-member-policy/).
> 
> _______________________________________________
> legal-discuss mailing list
> legal-discuss at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-discuss
> 
One of the issues the TC is currently trying to address is a decrease in
voter turnout for the TC elections [0].

If Foundation Membership is not required to contribute to the code base,
then I feel that membership and the benefits of membership (ATC status
and what that means) should be a well communicated opt-in process rather
than a requirement of submitting a patch.

Thank you,
Anita.

[0] Item 3: Election Stats and Review Discussion:
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2014/tc.2014-06-03-20.03.html