On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 06:41:38PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > - we should avoid anyone who is affiliated with a company that already > has a member on the committee. So nobody from Google and nobody from > GitHub. I would extend that to Microsoft, too, given a certain > impending acquisition. I'd expect anybody who is affiliated with a > company to recuse themselves from decisions that directly affect that > company (which is what we've done so far). > > - I think ideally the candidate would be somebody who represents the > long tail of volunteer community members who don't work on Git as > part of their day-job. The current members have a fairly skewed view > in that respect. At the same time, we can't really represent the > _really_ long tail of infrequent contributors, by the "stick around" > criterion above. Thanks both Christian and Ævar for giving more details on your situations elsewhere in the thread. I do think neither of you is quite in the "I just do this in my spare time" situation. But I also think that situation is going to be inversely correlated with being active in the project and wanting to spend time on governance stuff. So IMHO some compromise there is necessary. And I feel like both of you can represent those interests, even if they're not exactly the situation you're in. So what next? There was a little bit of off-list discussion (mostly nominations to avoid putting the candidate on the spot), but no new public candidates. I'm happy to entertain more discussion here, but it seems like everybody is reasonably happy with these two names. So either Junio and I can pick one, or possibly we could have both (that gives us a 4-person committee, but again, tied votes haven't been an issue so far). Any final thoughts are welcome. Also, on a more meta-level, I'm happy to hear any thoughts about this process that we might want to enshrine for later iterations. This is obviously not nearly as formal as something like Debian elections. But I don't think we're a big enough community to need that. So my attempt is to just keep things informal, but try to give as many opportunities as possible for people to speak up. -Peff
