[GRASS-PSC] RFC1 vote reminder

[Markus Neteler]

On 3/22/07, Paul Kelly <paul-grass at stjohnspoint.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Hamish wrote:
>
> > - Specifiying our HQ is ITC(or modern equivalent) is a good thing. It
> > shows clear lineage of group from Baylor, OGC, CERL [+OSGeo in future?].
> > It's a tangible entity. The "law" is probably not in sync with modern
> > virtual organizations, so having an address to ship a donation check to
> > (or subpoena ;) is a good thing. Sort of helps pick a legal venue on our
> > terms as well, if it ever comes to that. As there has not been a (major)
> > fork in the code, it is clear that GRASS is referring to us. So I think
> > it a very good idea to specify *-irst as the HQ. It's hard to argue what
>
> Yes I think I didn't read Scott's proposal well enough. I wasn't aware
> that we were deleting the explicit mention of the IRST institute.

Now we are mentioning Intevation without link to the CVS and
the Web site link without institute - looks a bit unbalanced.

> > a physical location means.
> >
> > - public submission period: cc grass-dev at the time a vote is called?
> > (keep folks in the loop; informing after the fact is disimpowering for
> > the greater community; they may bring up something we haven't thought
> > of)
>
> That's not a bad idea. There could be a rule that when a proposal is put
> forward it is always Cced to grass-dev. But then there is danger of the
> discussion ending up there instead of on grass-psc and it getting
> confusing. But maybe that isn't a bad thing - if it's relevant to
> grass-dev - and grass-psc can be used for stuff that isn't so relevant?

I am not a big friend of endless crossposting (and usually it is incomplete).
So, if, then dicussions should *move* to grass-dev and *go back* once
the technical issues are clarified.

> > - thanks Markus for working on the hundreds of copyright headers (made
> > easier by your [and other's] previous cleaning efforts over the years, I
> > am sure) FWIW, I understand the practical need for a script to do it,
> > but if doing it manually I wouldn't have added myself for little bug fix
> > or _(i18n) CVS commits, only if I added some original work into the
> > module.
>
> Yes isn't that what RFC2 says - that someone's name should only be added
> to the copyright notice when *subtantial* contributions are made to a
> file.

In this job it's impossible to verify how much a person contributed (unless
you can guess it from the Changelog). However, in several cases I didn't
include a person's name if s/he fixed only a typo or so.

> > Paul wrote:
> >> And with the four working days -  we have until 7:30pm Central
> >> European Time on Tuesday 27th March to discuss and vote on this.
> >
> > It seems funny to discuss, revise, [,repeat] while voting is open. The
> > call for votes should signal the end of discussion. (me: sorry for being
> > AWOL!) Changing the RFC after a vote is called must be banned, wait for
> > the next RFC to fix it. Otherwise an early +1 vote is for something they
> > haven't seen!

I agree.

> Yes it is all a mess now. I was aware there might be a little change (to
> the definition of the project and kind of sneakily wrote that into what I
> was voting on. But now more things have changed so my motion/proposal is
> obviously invalid now. But we don't necessarily have to call a new vote -
> as RFC1 says having consensus on the list is enough to pass a motion.

We definitely need to freeze the text once we are happy with it.

> > - Added Canonical's Rosetta translation project back onto the Agenda.
> >  http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/wiki/PSC_Agenda
> >
> > - Add our institutions and/or countries to the PSC wiki page?
> > (personal interest + adds some level of respectability)
> >  http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/wiki/PSC
>
> Not a bad idea. I'm not currently "affiliated" but no harm in putting my
> last known institution in I suppose! (Queen's University Belfast, Northern
> Ireland). I'm not an expert on mediawiki formatting so will leave that to
> someone else.

Paul, editing in mediawiki format takes only 5% of your CPU time :-)

>From tomorrow onwards I am offline for a week. I hesitate to send my
+1 now if further changes are anticipated. But I am general fine with the
texts.

Markus