[advocacy-discuss] Proposal for Cleveland OpenSolaris User Group Project

[Jim Grisanzio]

Tim Foster wrote:
> Yep, +1 from me 

Thanks. That's 3. Approved. Scott, watch for mail from me off list 
setting up your project.

> - in general it'd be great if there were some almost
> automatic way for new User Groups to get approved, something like "no
> -1s over a 1 week period, and you get created
>   

I'd like to make it easier, too.  I can set these things up very fast, 
so I'd like to get the voting and approvals down faster too. We've been 
following the Constitution, which states we need 3 votes from Core 
Contributors to get a project, but the Project Instantiation Policy 
encourages CGs to create their own policy for creating projects. And 
there is discussion on ogb-discuss about various conflicts creating 
projects, too. So, it's a bit confusing. But I think the Project 
Instantiation Policy gives us the most flexibility so we ought to draft 
our own process. I was hoping to avoid that. :) The best way to clarify 
is to write a one page doc like the Test guys did. We have parts of 
that, but it's not as complete and clear as theirs. I'll do that and 
send it around for comment early this week.

> The only cases where I'd consider disapproving the creation of a user
> group, is where there was another user group already existing in the
> same locality.
>   

I agree. And most people have been more than reasonable about dealing 
with any overlapping issues so far.

Jim
-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris