[GRASS-PSC] Open issues

[Scott Mitchell]

On 6-Dec-06, at 09:50, Markus Neteler wrote:
> On 12/6/06, Paul Kelly <paul-grass at stjohnspoint.co.uk> wrote:
> ...
>> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Markus Neteler wrote:
>> > Dear PSC,
>> >
>> > my list of pressing open issues is as follows:
>> > a) chair motion to be completed;
>>
>> I am certainly in favour of you being the chair, especially if you  
>> are
>> happy to do it! ;)
>
> "Happy" is definitely the wrong word. I am taking it as another  
> burden :-)
> Earlier I had hoped tjhat someone else would do it which doesn't
> seem to be the case.

I don't want to load up Markus either, but for the "chair-ship", my  
thinking is that at least in the initial stages, someone else being  
chair would probably end up asking Markus all the hard questions  
anyway, since Markus is the one that has been involved in the OSGEO  
discussions, the license audit, the web setup, etc etc...

Personally, for example, I don't think I could be an effective chair  
right now.  Maybe later, with the knowledge gained from working on this.

If you find this too much, or just feel at any point that it's time  
to revisit the issue, I'm sure we'd be happy to redistribute the  
load.  In the meantime, hopefully delegation can be the answer.

> I won't do the most work, since I already have too much to do in
> the GRASS project. We'll see how it works out. And certainly it's
> not a lifetime job.
> I would accept the vote if we agree
> - to keep PSC overhead as low as possible
> - distribute the work among us
>
I definitely support these.

>
>> > d) CVS write access to S. Pallecchi and R. Antolin
>>
>
> Due to my workload, I no longer want to be the bottleneck here.
> Since S. Pallecchi and R. Antolin are able to work with CVS, we should
> enable them to do so. I am really submitting too much for other  
> people,
> maybe we can invent a solution here (also merging translation files  
> etc).
>

Agreed again.  On the one hand, getting more people committing on  
their own is much better, and now we can do it with policy instead of  
ad-hoc.  On the other hand, for interim solutions / non-regular  
contributors, I am happy to take some of that load - I'm pretty  
confident using cvs (or even svn in the future?) for regular tasks,  
and feel much more secure about process / accountability now that we  
have had / will have discussions on proper licensing and decision  
process.

Hopefully that would help a BIT with your workload -- feel free to  
redirect some of these my way.

Cheers,
Scott