-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03.04.2009 21:02 Uhr, Tres Seaver wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
*This* part needs some fixing, largely because Jim's role their is an artifact of ZC's role, now lapsed, as custodians. At a minimum, there should be a group (I suggest the zope-web regulars) who can take over the maintenance of that application. A *different* group should have the role of collecting / approving the committer access requests. They'll end up being the same group pretty quickly, volunteers are thin on the ground :-/
Maybe, but the one group is doing "policy" (who should be a committer?), while the other is doing "mechanism" (get approved committers set up). The groups don't have to overlap, as long as the workflow is clear.
The Plone folks use a bugtracker for managing the committer access. A new contributor has to file a new ticket. A similar approach might be suited for managing new Zope committers. Speaking in workflow terms: a policy group could "accept" or "reject" the request. The mechanism group will deal with setting up the stuff for the committer and "close"-ing the case. Andreas -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAknWYSMACgkQCJIWIbr9KYxa4wCfdMbn7xVwowTRTVY9GlRAPMJ9 Mk4AmweFBudg2Z7XHA7JVfrMDVX2fLsk =eB1A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----