Request: CVS Write Access to Serena Pallecchi

[Markus Neteler-3]

Dear PSC,

since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
the first CVS write access request in this forum.

If there are no objections, I would like to grant write
access to Serena Pallecchi (pallecch*cli.di.unipi it) who
is maintainer of the new r.li suite. I just submitted
a bunch of changes from here to r.li and activated the
module in raster/Makefile since most problems are now
solved.

I don't think that we need a formal vote, but please speak
up in case of objections.

Thanks,
Markus

--
Markus Neteler  <neteler itc it>  http://mpa.itc.it/markus/
ITC-irst -  Centro per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica
MPBA - Predictive Models for Biol. & Environ. Data Analysis
Via Sommarive, 18        -       38050 Povo (Trento), Italy

[Frank Warmerdam]

Markus Neteler wrote:

> Dear PSC,
>
> since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
> the first CVS write access request in this forum.
>
> If there are no objections, I would like to grant write
> access to Serena Pallecchi (pallecch*cli.di.unipi it) who
> is maintainer of the new r.li suite. I just submitted
> a bunch of changes from here to r.li and activated the
> module in raster/Makefile since most problems are now
> solved.
>
> I don't think that we need a formal vote, but please speak
> up in case of objections.

Markus,

I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
submissions for legality.

I'd like to suggest that the GRASS PSC consider extending the SUBMITTING
file with a section on this topic and making part of the commiter approval
process requesting that the potential commiter review that information.
The text I use for GDAL appears under Legal in the document at:

   http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html

I also think that approving commiters is one of the more important things
that the PSC does, and that each ought to be formally voted on.  If you
find your voting process is too cumbersome to handle this quickly, then
perhaps you have set yourself too long a voting period!

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

[Markus Neteler-2]

On 11/22/06, Frank Warmerdam <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Markus Neteler wrote:
> > Dear PSC,
> >
> > since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
> > the first CVS write access request in this forum.
> >
> > If there are no objections, I would like to grant write
> > access to Serena Pallecchi (pallecch*cli.di.unipi it) who
> > is maintainer of the new r.li suite. I just submitted
> > a bunch of changes from here to r.li and activated the
> > module in raster/Makefile since most problems are now
> > solved.
> >
> > I don't think that we need a formal vote, but please speak
> > up in case of objections.
>
> Markus,
>
> I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
> the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
> code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
> submissions for legality.
>
> I'd like to suggest that the GRASS PSC consider extending the SUBMITTING
> file with a section on this topic and making part of the commiter approval
> process requesting that the potential commiter review that information.
> The text I use for GDAL appears under Legal in the document at:
>
>    http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
>
> I also think that approving commiters is one of the more important things
> that the PSC does, and that each ought to be formally voted on.  If you
> find your voting process is too cumbersome to handle this quickly, then
> perhaps you have set yourself too long a voting period!

Frank, PSC,

thanks for your feedback. I agree that we should define the legal part
in our SUBMITTING (or separate) document. The last years it worked
pretty well, but I think that with a growing group of developers (finally!)
we need to flesh out some rules.

I have now used the "Legal" section of
http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
and drafted a text for us, see attachment. Please (all) comment.

Markus

Legal

GRASS developers have to keep the code base clear of improperly
contributed code. It is important to the GRASS users, developers and
the OSGeo foundation to avoid contributing any code to the project
without it being clearly licensed under the project license or a
compliant license. The committer below is understood as developer with
write access to the GRASS source code repository.

Generally speaking, the key issues are that those individuals
providing code to be included in the GRASS repository understand that
the code will be released under the GPL >=2 license, and that the
person providing the code has the right to contribute the code. For
the committer themselves understanding about the license needs to be
clear. When committing 3rd party contributions, the committer should
verify the understanding unless the committer is very comfortable that
the contributor understands the license (for instance frequent
contributors).

If the contribution was developed on behalf of an employer (on work
time, as part of a work project, etc) then it is important that an
appropriate representative of the employer understand that the code
will be contributed under the GPL license. The arrangement should be
cleared with an authorized supervisor/manager, etc.

The code should be developed by the contributor, or the code should be
from a source which can be rightfully contributed such as from the
public domain, or from an open source project under a compatible
license.

All unusual situations need to be discussed and/or documented.

Committers should adhere to the following guidelines, and may be
personally legally liable for improperly contributing code to the
source repository:

* Make sure the contributor (and possibly employer) is aware of the
  contribution terms.

* Code coming from a source other than the contributor (such as
  adapted from another project) should be clearly marked as to the
  original source, copyright holders, license terms and so forth. This
  information can be in the file headers, but should also be added to
  the project licensing file if not exactly matching normal project
  licensing (grass/COPYRIGHT.txt).

* Existing copyright headers and license text should never be stripped
  from a file. If a copyright holder wishes to give up copyright they
  must do so in writing to the GRASS-PSC before copyright messages
  are removed. If license terms are changed, it has to be by agreement
  (written in email is ok) of the copyright holders.

* When substantial contributions are added to a file (such as
  substantial patches) the author/contributor should be added to the
  list of copyright holders for the file in the file header.

* If there is uncertainty about whether a change it proper to
  contribute to the code base, please seek more information from the
  project steering committee, other GRASS developers or the OSGeo
  foundation legal counsel.

[Scott Mitchell-3]

On 26 Nov 2006, at 17:34, Markus Neteler wrote:

> On 11/22/06, Frank Warmerdam <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Markus Neteler wrote:
>> > Dear PSC,
>> >
>> > since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
>> > the first CVS write access request in this forum.
>>
>> Markus,
>>
>> I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
>> the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
>> code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
>> submissions for legality.
>>
>> I'd like to suggest that the GRASS PSC consider extending the  
>> SUBMITTING
>> file with a section on this topic and making part of the commiter  
>> approval
>> process requesting that the potential commiter review that  
>> information.
>
> Frank, PSC,
>
> thanks for your feedback. I agree that we should define the legal part
> in our SUBMITTING (or separate) document. The last years it worked
> pretty well, but I think that with a growing group of developers  
> (finally!)
> we need to flesh out some rules.
>
> I have now used the "Legal" section of
> http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
> and drafted a text for us, see attachment. Please (all) comment.
>
> Markus
>

Good idea, I appreciate the structured reminder of issues to keep in  

mind.

I've made some suggested small edits to the file, but have no  
substantial changes.



Legal

GRASS developers have to keep the code base clear of improperly
contributed code. It is important to the GRASS users, developers and
the OSGeo foundation to avoid contributing any code to the project
without it being clearly licensed under the project license or a
compliant license.  In this document, a "committer" is understood to be a developer with write access to the GRASS source code repository.

Generally speaking, the key issues are that those individuals
providing code to be included in the GRASS repository understand that
the code will be released under the GPL >=2 license, and that the
person providing the code has the right to contribute the code. For
the committers themselves understanding about the license needs to be
clear. When committing 3rd party contributions, the committer should
verify the understanding unless the committer is very comfortable that
the contributor understands the license (for instance frequent
contributors).

If the contribution was developed on behalf of an employer (on work
time, as part of a work project, etc) then it is important that an
appropriate representative of the employer understand that the code
will be contributed under the GPL license. The arrangement should be
cleared with an authorized supervisor/manager, etc.

The code should be developed by the contributor, or the code should be
from a source which can be rightfully contributed such as from the
public domain, or from an open source project under a compatible
license.

All unusual situations need to be discussed and/or documented.

Committers should adhere to the following guidelines, and may be
personally legally liable for improperly contributing code to the
source repository:

* Make sure the contributor (and possibly employer) is aware of the
  contribution terms.

* Code coming from a source other than the contributor (such as
  adapted from another project) should be clearly marked as to the
  original source, copyright holders, license terms and so forth. This
  information can be in the file headers, but should also be added to
  the project licensing file if not exactly matching normal project
  licensing (grass/COPYRIGHT.txt).

* Existing copyright headers and license text should never be stripped
  from a file. If a copyright holder wishes to give up copyright they
  must do so in writing to the GRASS-PSC before copyright messages
  are removed. If license terms are changed, it has to be by agreement
  (written in email is ok) of the copyright holders.

* When substantial contributions are added to a file (such as
  substantial patches) the author/contributor should be added to the
  list of copyright holders for the file in the file header.

* If there is uncertainty about whether a change is proper to
  contribute to the code base, please seek more information from the
  project steering committee, other GRASS developers or the OSGeo
  foundation legal counsel.

[Michael Barton]

These look good. Quite clear.

Michael
__________________________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University

phone: [phone]
fax: [phone]
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton

> From: Scott Mitchell <[hidden email]>
> Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 19:07:22 -0500
> To: Markus Neteler <[hidden email]>
> Cc: GRASS-PSC <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [GRASS-PSC] Request: CVS Write Access to Serena Pallecchi
>
> On 26 Nov 2006, at 17:34, Markus Neteler wrote:
>
>> On 11/22/06, Frank Warmerdam <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Markus Neteler wrote:
>>>> Dear PSC,
>>>>
>>>> since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
>>>> the first CVS write access request in this forum.
>>>
>>> Markus,
>>>
>>> I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
>>> the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
>>> code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
>>> submissions for legality.
>>>
>>> I'd like to suggest that the GRASS PSC consider extending the
>>> SUBMITTING
>>> file with a section on this topic and making part of the commiter
>>> approval
>>> process requesting that the potential commiter review that
>>> information.
>>
>> Frank, PSC,
>>
>> thanks for your feedback. I agree that we should define the legal part
>> in our SUBMITTING (or separate) document. The last years it worked
>> pretty well, but I think that with a growing group of developers
>> (finally!)
>> we need to flesh out some rules.
>>
>> I have now used the "Legal" section of
>> http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
>> and drafted a text for us, see attachment. Please (all) comment.
>>
>> Markus
>>
> Good idea, I appreciate the structured reminder of issues to keep in
> mind.
>
> I've made some suggested small edits to the file, but have no
> substantial changes.
>
> _______________________________________________
> grass-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc

[Helena Mitasova]

looks good to me too, we certainly need it,

Helena

Helena Mitasova
Dept. of Marine, Earth and Atm. Sciences
1125 Jordan Hall, NCSU Box 8208,
Raleigh NC 27695
http://skagit.meas.ncsu.edu/~helena/



On Nov 26, 2006, at 7:07 PM, Scott Mitchell wrote:

> On 26 Nov 2006, at 17:34, Markus Neteler wrote:
>
>> On 11/22/06, Frank Warmerdam <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Markus Neteler wrote:
>>> > Dear PSC,
>>> >
>>> > since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
>>> > the first CVS write access request in this forum.
>>>
>>> Markus,
>>>
>>> I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
>>> the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
>>> code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
>>> submissions for legality.
>>>
>>> I'd like to suggest that the GRASS PSC consider extending the  
>>> SUBMITTING
>>> file with a section on this topic and making part of the commiter  
>>> approval
>>> process requesting that the potential commiter review that  
>>> information.
>>
>> Frank, PSC,
>>
>> thanks for your feedback. I agree that we should define the legal  
>> part
>> in our SUBMITTING (or separate) document. The last years it worked
>> pretty well, but I think that with a growing group of developers  
>> (finally!)
>> we need to flesh out some rules.
>>
>> I have now used the "Legal" section of
>> http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
>> and drafted a text for us, see attachment. Please (all) comment.
>>
>> Markus
>>
> Good idea, I appreciate the structured reminder of issues to keep  
> in mind.
>
> I've made some suggested small edits to the file, but have no  
> substantial changes.
>
> <grass_code_contribution.diff>
> <grass_code_contribution_v2.txt>
> _______________________________________________
> grass-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc

[Brad Douglas]

Looks good.  My only comment is to provide a physical address that is
associated with GRASS.  This is probably required for legality, but
specifically to allow copyright holders to remove themselves as stated
in the new documents.

I would suggest that the address correspond to the PSC lead.

On Sun, 2006-11-26 at 19:07 -0500, Scott Mitchell wrote:

> On 26 Nov 2006, at 17:34, Markus Neteler wrote:
>
> > On 11/22/06, Frank Warmerdam <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> Markus Neteler wrote:
> >> > Dear PSC,
> >> >
> >> > since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
> >> > the first CVS write access request in this forum.
> >>
> >> Markus,
> >>
> >> I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
> >> the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
> >> code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
> >> submissions for legality.
> >>
> >> I'd like to suggest that the GRASS PSC consider extending the  
> >> SUBMITTING
> >> file with a section on this topic and making part of the commiter  
> >> approval
> >> process requesting that the potential commiter review that  
> >> information.
> >
> > Frank, PSC,
> >
> > thanks for your feedback. I agree that we should define the legal part
> > in our SUBMITTING (or separate) document. The last years it worked
> > pretty well, but I think that with a growing group of developers  
> > (finally!)
> > we need to flesh out some rules.
> >
> > I have now used the "Legal" section of
> > http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
> > and drafted a text for us, see attachment. Please (all) comment.
> >
> > Markus
> >
> Good idea, I appreciate the structured reminder of issues to keep in  
> mind.
>
> I've made some suggested small edits to the file, but have no  
> substantial changes.

--
Brad Douglas <rez touchofmadness com>                    KB8UYR/6
Address: 37.493,-121.924 / WGS84    National Map Corps #TNMC-3785

[Scott Mitchell-3]

So, also, if the vote is called, +1 for Serena's write access.

On 27 Nov 2006, at 04:07, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:

> Sounds good to me too. Clear and correct.
> Massimiliano
>
> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>> Markus Neteler wrote:
>>> Dear PSC,
>>>
>>> since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
>>> the first CVS write access request in this forum.
>>>
>>> If there are no objections, I would like to grant write
>>> access to Serena Pallecchi

...
>> I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
>> the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
>> code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
>> submissions for legality.
...

>> thanks for your feedback. I agree that we should define the legal  
>> part
>> in our SUBMITTING (or separate) document. The last years it worked
>> pretty well, but I think that with a growing group of developers  
>> (finally!)
>> we need to flesh out some rules.
>>
>> I have now used the "Legal" section of
>> http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
>> and drafted a text for us, see attachment. Please (all) comment.
>>
>> Markus
>>
>>
> Good idea, I appreciate the structured reminder of issues to keep  
> in mind.
>
> I've made some suggested small edits to the file, but have no  
> substantial changes.
>
> <grass_code_contribution.diff>
> <grass_code_contribution_v2.txt>
>

[HamishB]

Brad Douglas wrote:
> Looks good.  My only comment is to provide a physical address that is
> associated with GRASS.  This is probably required for legality, but
> specifically to allow copyright holders to remove themselves as stated
> in the new documents.
>
> I would suggest that the address correspond to the PSC lead.


GRASS> g.version -c
GRASS 6.3.cvs (2006)

Copyright and License Statement

The Geographic Resources Analysis and Support System (GRASS)
Geographic Information System (GIS) is Copyright by the
GRASS Development Team headquartered at ITC-irst, in Trento, Italy.

This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
option) any later version.

Parts of GRASS are not copyright by the GRASS development team.
The original authors hold the copyrights and you have to abide
to their licensing terms where noted.
(Keep in mind that code linking into GRASS can only be distributed
if compatible with the GPL.)                              

This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
GNU General Public License (GPL) for more details.

You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program; if not, write to the
  Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
  59 Temple Place - Suite 330,
  Boston, MA  02111-1307, USA.

Questions regarding GRASS GIS should be directed to the
GRASS Development Team at the following address:

 GRASS Development Team
 ITC-Irst
 c/o M. Neteler
 SSI/MPA
 Via Sommarive, 18
 38050 Trento (Povo)
 Italy
 [hidden email]

Internet:  http://grass.itc.it
           http://grass.ibiblio.org


======


Hamish

[HamishB]

Scott Mitchell wrote:
>  person providing the code has the right to contribute the code. For
> -the committer themselves understanding about the license needs to be
> +the committers themselves understanding about the license needs to be
>  clear.

This sentence still needs some work.

"In order to verify this, the committer must have a clear understanding of
the license themselves."


Hamish

[Michael Barton]

Looks good to me.

Michael
__________________________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University

phone: [phone]
fax: [phone]
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton

> From: Hamish <[hidden email]>
> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:02:19 +1300
> To: <[hidden email]>
> Cc: <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [GRASS-PSC] Request: CVS Write Access to Serena Pallecchi
>
> Brad Douglas wrote:
>> Looks good.  My only comment is to provide a physical address that is
>> associated with GRASS.  This is probably required for legality, but
>> specifically to allow copyright holders to remove themselves as stated
>> in the new documents.
>>
>> I would suggest that the address correspond to the PSC lead.
>
>
> GRASS> g.version -c
> GRASS 6.3.cvs (2006)
>
> Copyright and License Statement
>
> The Geographic Resources Analysis and Support System (GRASS)
> Geographic Information System (GIS) is Copyright by the
> GRASS Development Team headquartered at ITC-irst, in Trento, Italy.
>
> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
> Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
> option) any later version.
>
> Parts of GRASS are not copyright by the GRASS development team.
> The original authors hold the copyrights and you have to abide
> to their licensing terms where noted.
> (Keep in mind that code linking into GRASS can only be distributed
> if compatible with the GPL.)
>
> This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> GNU General Public License (GPL) for more details.
>
> You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> along with this program; if not, write to the
>   Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
>   59 Temple Place - Suite 330,
>   Boston, MA  02111-1307, USA.
>
> Questions regarding GRASS GIS should be directed to the
> GRASS Development Team at the following address:
>
>  GRASS Development Team
>  ITC-Irst
>  c/o M. Neteler
>  SSI/MPA
>  Via Sommarive, 18
>  38050 Trento (Povo)
>  Italy
>  [hidden email]
>
> Internet:  http://grass.itc.it
>            http://grass.ibiblio.org
>
>
> ======
>
>
> Hamish
>
> _______________________________________________
> grass-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc

[Brad Douglas]

On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 13:02 +1300, Hamish wrote:

> Brad Douglas wrote:
> > Looks good.  My only comment is to provide a physical address that is
> > associated with GRASS.  This is probably required for legality, but
> > specifically to allow copyright holders to remove themselves as stated
> > in the new documents.
> >
> > I would suggest that the address correspond to the PSC lead.
>
>
> GRASS> g.version -c
> GRASS 6.3.cvs (2006)
>
> Copyright and License Statement
>
> The Geographic Resources Analysis and Support System (GRASS)
> Geographic Information System (GIS) is Copyright by the
> GRASS Development Team headquartered at ITC-irst, in Trento, Italy.
>
> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
> Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your
> option) any later version.
>
> Parts of GRASS are not copyright by the GRASS development team.
> The original authors hold the copyrights and you have to abide
> to their licensing terms where noted.
> (Keep in mind that code linking into GRASS can only be distributed
> if compatible with the GPL.)                              
>
> This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> GNU General Public License (GPL) for more details.
>
> You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> along with this program; if not, write to the
>   Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
>   59 Temple Place - Suite 330,
>   Boston, MA  02111-1307, USA.
>
> Questions regarding GRASS GIS should be directed to the
> GRASS Development Team at the following address:
>
>  GRASS Development Team
>  ITC-Irst
>  c/o M. Neteler
>  SSI/MPA
>  Via Sommarive, 18
>  38050 Trento (Povo)
>  Italy
>  [hidden email]

IMHO, this should be copied into documentation or at least referenced.


--
Brad Douglas <rez touchofmadness com>                    KB8UYR/6
Address: 37.493,-121.924 / WGS84    National Map Corps #TNMC-3785

[Markus Neteler-2]

Dear PSC,

after adoption of the legal document I would like to bring up
this issue again. Frank Warmdam suggested to formally vote
on CVS write access as in his opinion approving commiters
is one of the more important things that the PSC  does
(I agree), so here the current state to my knowledge:

 * Brad
 * Dylan
 * Hamish
 * Helena
 * Maciej
 * Markus: +1
 * Massimiliano
 * Michael
 * Paul
 * Scott: +1

Please let us get this issue done asap.

thanks,
Markus

On 11/21/06, Markus Neteler <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dear PSC,
>
> since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
> the first CVS write access request in this forum.
>
> If there are no objections, I would like to grant write
> access to Serena Pallecchi (pallecch*cli.di.unipi it) who
> is maintainer of the new r.li suite. I just submitted
> a bunch of changes from here to r.li and activated the
> module in raster/Makefile since most problems are now
> solved.
>
> I don't think that we need a formal vote, but please speak
> up in case of objections.
>
> Thanks,
> Markus
>
> --
> Markus Neteler  <neteler itc it>  http://mpa.itc.it/markus/
> ITC-irst -  Centro per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica
> MPBA - Predictive Models for Biol. & Environ. Data Analysis
> Via Sommarive, 18        -       38050 Povo (Trento), Italy
>
> _______________________________________________
> grass-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc
>

--
Open Source Geospatial Foundation
http://www.osgeo.org/
http://grass.osgeo.org/

[Michael Barton]

On 12/8/06 10:25 AM, "Markus Neteler" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dear PSC,
>
> after adoption of the legal document I would like to bring up
> this issue again. Frank Warmdam suggested to formally vote
> on CVS write access as in his opinion approving commiters
> is one of the more important things that the PSC  does
> (I agree), so here the current state to my knowledge:
>
>  * Brad
>  * Dylan
>  * Hamish
>  * Helena
>  * Maciej
>  * Markus: +1
>  * Massimiliano
>  * Michael
>  * Paul
>  * Scott: +1
>

I thought I already voted on this.

+1

Michael

__________________________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics and Complexity
Arizona State University

phone: [phone]
fax: [phone]
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton 

[Dylan Beaudette]

On Friday 08 December 2006 09:37, Michael Barton wrote:

> On 12/8/06 10:25 AM, "Markus Neteler" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Dear PSC,
> >
> > after adoption of the legal document I would like to bring up
> > this issue again. Frank Warmdam suggested to formally vote
> > on CVS write access as in his opinion approving commiters
> > is one of the more important things that the PSC  does
> > (I agree), so here the current state to my knowledge:
> >
> >  * Brad
> >  * Dylan
> >  * Hamish
> >  * Helena
> >  * Maciej
> >  * Markus: +1
> >  * Massimiliano
> >  * Michael
> >  * Paul
> >  * Scott: +1
>
> I thought I already voted on this.
>
> +1
>
> Michael
>
> __________________________________________
> Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
> School of Human Evolution & Social Change
> Center for Social Dynamics and Complexity
> Arizona State University
>
> phone: [phone]
> fax: [phone]
> www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton
>

+1 from me.

I think that it will be a good thing to have the maintainer of the new r.li
suite in the main development loop. The r.li.* modules represent some very
interesting, and perhaps under-utilized, modules!

Dylan

--
Dylan Beaudette
Soils and Biogeochemistry Graduate Group
University of California at Davis
530.754.7341

[Brad Douglas]

On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 10:37 -0700, Michael Barton wrote:

> On 12/8/06 10:25 AM, "Markus Neteler" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Dear PSC,
> >
> > after adoption of the legal document I would like to bring up
> > this issue again. Frank Warmdam suggested to formally vote
> > on CVS write access as in his opinion approving commiters
> > is one of the more important things that the PSC  does
> > (I agree), so here the current state to my knowledge:
> >
> >  * Brad
> >  * Dylan
> >  * Hamish
> >  * Helena
> >  * Maciej
> >  * Markus: +1
> >  * Massimiliano
> >  * Michael
> >  * Paul
> >  * Scott: +1
> >
>
> I thought I already voted on this.
>
> +1

Ditto. +1

Maybe we could write a "secretarial" position into the PSC who keeps
tally and summary on votes, etc?


--
Brad Douglas <rez touchofmadness com>                    KB8UYR/6
Address: 37.493,-121.924 / WGS84    National Map Corps #TNMC-3785

[Brad Douglas]

On Fri, 2006-12-08 at 16:30 -0500, Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> Brad Douglas wrote:
> >> I thought I already voted on this.
> >>
> >> +1
> >
> > Ditto. +1
> >
> > Maybe we could write a "secretarial" position into the PSC who keeps
> > tally and summary on votes, etc?
>
> Folks,
>
> The approach I've taken in other venues is to require the person who makes
> the motion to summarize the vote on closing.  This keeps the work load on
> the person who was interested enough to propose the vote rather than just
> dumping it on the chair.  I will say that digging through all the emails
> in a thread to collect and summarize a motion vote can be 10-20 minutes
> of work so I would hesitate to dump it on the chair on an active committee.

I would consider that a conflict of interest for an unscrupulous
person. :-)  However, it's something that can be fairly easily verified.

> I think it is important to have a clear vote period, and to summarize the
> results when a vote closes just so it is clear when something is settled.

Agreed.  Okay...I'm sold on the proposer maintaining the discussion and
calling a vote.  It would be nice to have someone on the PSC summarize
the vote and comments in a standard format for easy future reference,
but that's a bit of a wish on my part.


--
Brad Douglas <rez touchofmadness com>                    KB8UYR/6
Address: 37.493,-121.924 / WGS84    National Map Corps #TNMC-3785

[Frank Warmerdam]

Brad Douglas wrote:
>> I thought I already voted on this.
>>
>> +1
>
> Ditto. +1
>
> Maybe we could write a "secretarial" position into the PSC who keeps
> tally and summary on votes, etc?

Folks,

The approach I've taken in other venues is to require the person who makes
the motion to summarize the vote on closing.  This keeps the work load on
the person who was interested enough to propose the vote rather than just
dumping it on the chair.  I will say that digging through all the emails
in a thread to collect and summarize a motion vote can be 10-20 minutes
of work so I would hesitate to dump it on the chair on an active committee.

I think it is important to have a clear vote period, and to summarize the
results when a vote closes just so it is clear when something is settled.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

[Maciej Sieczka - old]

+1 for CVS Write Access to Serena Pallecchi

Maciek

[Helena Mitasova]

+1 from me (I thought I already voted too).

Helena

On Dec 8, 2006, at 2:03 PM, Dylan Beaudette wrote:

> On Friday 08 December 2006 09:37, Michael Barton wrote:
>> On 12/8/06 10:25 AM, "Markus Neteler" <[hidden email]>  
>> wrote:
>>> Dear PSC,
>>>
>>> after adoption of the legal document I would like to bring up
>>> this issue again. Frank Warmdam suggested to formally vote
>>> on CVS write access as in his opinion approving commiters
>>> is one of the more important things that the PSC  does
>>> (I agree), so here the current state to my knowledge:
>>>
>>>  * Brad
>>>  * Dylan
>>>  * Hamish
>>>  * Helena
>>>  * Maciej
>>>  * Markus: +1
>>>  * Massimiliano
>>>  * Michael
>>>  * Paul
>>>  * Scott: +1
>>
>> I thought I already voted on this.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> __________________________________________
>> Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
>> School of Human Evolution & Social Change
>> Center for Social Dynamics and Complexity
>> Arizona State University
>>
>> phone: [phone]
>> fax: [phone]
>> www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton
>>
>
> +1 from me.
>
> I think that it will be a good thing to have the maintainer of the  
> new r.li
> suite in the main development loop. The r.li.* modules represent  
> some very
> interesting, and perhaps under-utilized, modules!
>
> Dylan
>
> --
> Dylan Beaudette
> Soils and Biogeochemistry Graduate Group
> University of California at Davis
> 530.754.7341
>
> _______________________________________________
> grass-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc