On 10/02/2008, Thomas Hertweck
terms! Your own sentence cited above shows how obscure the situation now is: you talk about "loose members" and "openSUSE members". Sorry, but I think the approach you took wasn't such a good idea, and obviously other people also stated that they feel somewhat uncomfortable. You shouldn't have called your approach a "membership". In principle it comes down to two questions: Can you measure contributions in an open community with such a variety of people and skills in absolute terms (see my email to Pascal)? And secondly, should you be allowed to change the definition of "membership" although it has already been used over the last ten years and it has gained a certain meaning?
You keep stating that you are unhappy with the terminology and approach. If you can suggest an improvement to either than please state it. It is difficult to understand your viewpoint when you are only criticising and not suggesting alternatives. If you were the board, what would you do? How would you allocate @opensuse.org addresses, how would you expand the set of people who are seen to comprise and represent the openSUSE project to include non-Novell employees? It has been repeatedly stated by the board that the system can be improved/adjusted as it grows. If your suggestions are good then perhaps they can help. -- Benjamin Weber --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org