Discussion on Addressing Voting Issues and Proposed Update to Committer Rules

[Hauke Mehrtens]

Hi Ted,

On 5/3/25 22:41, Ted Hess wrote:
> Hi all -
> 
> Added my response to the bottom for those who prefer it that way ;)
> 
> On 5/3/2025 12:45:48 PM, "Hauke Mehrtens" <hauke at hauke-m.de> wrote:
> 
......
> 
> 
> I understand your frustration over the lack of voting participation. It 
> is certainly an indication that the number of "committers" has become 
> large with too many non-participants on questions of membership and 
> organization. I essentially agree with your proposal but will reserve 
> buy-in until we see the actual or proposed list of active and inactive 
> members. I hope we do not find ourselves in a "catch-22" situation where 
> we cannot get enough participants to adopt this proposal even.


All current committers should transfer into the active committers 
section in the beginning. In the next step I will probably ask some 
people who haven't committed anything or send a mail to the public lists 
in the last 6 months if they want to move into the inactive category.

The proposed rules do not allow to force someone into the inactive 
committers list. Even when you are in this list, you can just move back 
again to active committers.

> That said, I'm sorry I didn't vote for DragonBluep - I didn't have any 
> objection. I just was unfamiliar with his work and would have gladly 
> gone along with others recommendations.

It would be nice if you would vote neutral in that case.

> The infrastructure issues currently existing are not in anyway helped by 
> this rules proposal and should be a separate discussion among those who 
> actually want to participate in its management. Forum and Wiki 
> moderation is not currently or even in the past handled by "committers" 
> - rather, just a handful of dedicated, helplful users.

Is this about changing committers into members or an other part of the 
proposal?
Do you think this proposal increases the infrastructure problems?

Hauke